Radio America Newshttps://www.spreaker.com/show/radio-america-newsenPoliticsCopyright Radio Americahttps://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/d384f6b9c2eae9e9a93836c6196149c5.jpgRadio America Newshttps://www.spreaker.com/show/radio-america-newsRadio AmericaRadio Americafeeds@spreaker.comDaily News Features with Greg CoromboscleanepisodicRadio Americafeeds@spreaker.comDaily News Features with Greg CorombosNoTrump Vows Action if Minnesota Violence Continueshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/treglia-5-29https://api.spreaker.com/episode/28662893Fri, 29 May 2020 21:03:51 +0000Radio AmericaAfter another destructive night of protests in Minneapolis in response to the police-involved death of George Floyd, President Trump is promising to restore order if Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey doesn't do it first. Radio America's Nick Treglia reports.51news,trump,minnesota,floydcleanfullRadio AmericaAfter another destructive night of protests in Minneapolis in response to the police-involved death of George Floyd, President Trump is promising to restore order if Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey doesn't do it first. Radio America's Nick Treglia reports.No'This Is the End of Hong Kong'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/chang_10"This is the end of Hong Kong," said Hong Kong legislator Dennis Kwok.

"This is the end of one country, two systems. Make no mistake about it, that Beijing, the Central People's Government, has completely breached its promise to the Hong Kong people," added Kwok.

What exactly is China doing and why is it doing it now and what will happen to the thriving business and relative freedoms in Hong Kong if this happens? We ask China expert Gordon G. Chang.

In this podcast, we'll also ask Chang what the U.S. can do in response and why so many political and media figures keep defending China despite its repression of freedom in Hong Kong and its obvious deception about the origins of the coronavirus.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/28000233Thu, 21 May 2020 22:06:31 +0000Radio AmericaChina's ceremonial parliament will soon act to pass "national security" legislation that will bypass the Hong Kong legislature impose major restrictions on protesters there.
"This is the end of Hong Kong," said Hong Kong legislator Dennis Kwok. ..."This is the end of Hong Kong," said Hong Kong legislator Dennis Kwok.

"This is the end of one country, two systems. Make no mistake about it, that Beijing, the Central People's Government, has completely breached its promise to the Hong Kong people," added Kwok.

What exactly is China doing and why is it doing it now and what will happen to the thriving business and relative freedoms in Hong Kong if this happens? We ask China expert Gordon G. Chang.

In this podcast, we'll also ask Chang what the U.S. can do in response and why so many political and media figures keep defending China despite its repression of freedom in Hong Kong and its obvious deception about the origins of the coronavirus.]]>628media,china,freedom,kong,hong,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaChina's ceremonial parliament will soon act to pass "national security" legislation that will bypass the Hong Kong legislature impose major restrictions on protesters there.
"This is the end of Hong Kong," said Hong Kong legislator Dennis Kwok.
"This is the end of one country, two systems. Make no mistake about it, that Beijing, the Central People's Government, has completely breached its promise to the Hong Kong people," added Kwok.
What exactly is China doing and why is it doing it now and what will happen to the thriving business and relative freedoms in Hong Kong if this happens? We ask China expert Gordon G. Chang.
In this podcast, we'll also ask Chang what the U.S. can do in response and why so many political and media figures keep defending China despite its repression of freedom in Hong Kong and its obvious deception about the origins of the coronavirus.NoTorrential Rains Trigger Michigan Floodinghttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/claire-5-20-2https://api.spreaker.com/episode/27910629Wed, 20 May 2020 22:15:00 +0000Radio AmericaMore than 10,000 Michigan residents were evacuated after heavy rains and swollen rivers were too much for two dams in the Midland, Michigan, area. Radio America's Claire Alfree has the story.59news,michigan,floodingcleanfullRadio AmericaMore than 10,000 Michigan residents were evacuated after heavy rains and swollen rivers were too much for two dams in the Midland, Michigan, area. Radio America's Claire Alfree has the story.NoPelosi's Relief Bill: Vital Aid or Fleecing Taxpayers?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/adam_6One trillion of that is designated as financial assistance for cash-strapped states and localities, but is taxpayer money the best way to deal with this challenge?

Openthebooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski joins us to explain why he thinks Pelosi has the wrong idea and he uses Illinois as just one example of the states that were in a fiscal mess even before the virus hit.

Andrzejewski also details how a number of ostensibly charitable hospitals are just sitting on many billions of dollars in endowments but instead of using that money to respond to the crisis, they are taking money from taxpayers...and so are the wealthiest colleges and universities.

Finally, Andrzejewski discusses the mushrooming debt brought on by trillions in emergency spending, what the impact of that will be, and whether fiscal discipline still has a pulse in Washington.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/27306123Thu, 14 May 2020 17:00:04 +0000Radio AmericaThis week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unveiled a new coronavirus relief bill with the eye-popping price tag of nearly $3 trillion.
One trillion of that is designated as financial assistance for cash-strapped states and localities, but is taxpayer...One trillion of that is designated as financial assistance for cash-strapped states and localities, but is taxpayer money the best way to deal with this challenge?

Openthebooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski joins us to explain why he thinks Pelosi has the wrong idea and he uses Illinois as just one example of the states that were in a fiscal mess even before the virus hit.

Andrzejewski also details how a number of ostensibly charitable hospitals are just sitting on many billions of dollars in endowments but instead of using that money to respond to the crisis, they are taking money from taxpayers...and so are the wealthiest colleges and universities.

Finally, Andrzejewski discusses the mushrooming debt brought on by trillions in emergency spending, what the impact of that will be, and whether fiscal discipline still has a pulse in Washington.]]>718news,taxes,pelosi,debt,hospitals,states,relief,stimulus,endowments,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaThis week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unveiled a new coronavirus relief bill with the eye-popping price tag of nearly $3 trillion.
One trillion of that is designated as financial assistance for cash-strapped states and localities, but is taxpayer money the best way to deal with this challenge?
Openthebooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski joins us to explain why he thinks Pelosi has the wrong idea and he uses Illinois as just one example of the states that were in a fiscal mess even before the virus hit.
Andrzejewski also details how a number of ostensibly charitable hospitals are just sitting on many billions of dollars in endowments but instead of using that money to respond to the crisis, they are taking money from taxpayers...and so are the wealthiest colleges and universities.
Finally, Andrzejewski discusses the mushrooming debt brought on by trillions in emergency spending, what the impact of that will be, and whether fiscal discipline still has a pulse in Washington.NoHeavy-Handed Government: McCarthy Talks Flynn Case, COVID Copshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_19In a statement, the DOJ said the January 2017 interview was "untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn” and that the interview was “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis" and that it was dropping the case "after a considered review of all the facts and circumstances of this case, including newly discovered and disclosed information."

So how did this case move from a Flynn guilty plea to the Justice Department wanting to dump the matter? Was Flynn the victim of a very shoddy process or are other lawyers right that the FBI used standard tactics in speaking with Flynn?

Former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew C. McCarthy says the FBI conduct towards Flynn was highly improper and amounted to little more than an effort to get him to lie without any underlying criminal predicate.

McCarthy and Radio America's Greg Corombos also discuss whether most Americans will see this as a decision made on the facts and the law or through their partisan lenses.

In addition, McCarthy discusses Ventura County, California, officials announcing that COVID-infected patients may be forced to leave their homes if others in the residence test negative and there is only one bathroom. Is that constitutional? And what does it say about how governments are responding to this crisis?

Don't miss McCarthy's insights on these two critical issues.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/26879944Thu, 07 May 2020 21:39:41 +0000Radio AmericaOn Thursday, the Justice Department announced it's desire to drop the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, a move that does not come as much of a surprise following last week's revelation that FBI agents went to interview him...In a statement, the DOJ said the January 2017 interview was "untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn” and that the interview was “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis" and that it was dropping the case "after a considered review of all the facts and circumstances of this case, including newly discovered and disclosed information."

So how did this case move from a Flynn guilty plea to the Justice Department wanting to dump the matter? Was Flynn the victim of a very shoddy process or are other lawyers right that the FBI used standard tactics in speaking with Flynn?

Former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew C. McCarthy says the FBI conduct towards Flynn was highly improper and amounted to little more than an effort to get him to lie without any underlying criminal predicate.

McCarthy and Radio America's Greg Corombos also discuss whether most Americans will see this as a decision made on the facts and the law or through their partisan lenses.

In addition, McCarthy discusses Ventura County, California, officials announcing that COVID-infected patients may be forced to leave their homes if others in the residence test negative and there is only one bathroom. Is that constitutional? And what does it say about how governments are responding to this crisis?

Don't miss McCarthy's insights on these two critical issues.]]>978news,bill,flynn,doj,ventura,fbi,barr,covid-19cleanfullRadio AmericaOn Thursday, the Justice Department announced it's desire to drop the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, a move that does not come as much of a surprise following last week's revelation that FBI agents went to interview him in the White House with the intent of getting him to lie or to admit something that could get him fired or prosecuted.
In a statement, the DOJ said the January 2017 interview was "untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn” and that the interview was “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis" and that it was dropping the case "after a considered review of all the facts and circumstances of this case, including newly discovered and disclosed information."
So how did this case move from a Flynn guilty plea to the Justice Department wanting to dump the matter? Was Flynn the victim of a very shoddy process or are other lawyers right that the FBI used standard tactics in speaking with Flynn?
Former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew C. McCarthy says the FBI conduct towards Flynn was highly improper and amounted to little more than an effort to get him to lie without any underlying criminal predicate.
McCarthy and Radio America's Greg Corombos also discuss whether most Americans will see this as a decision made on the facts and the law or through their partisan lenses.
In addition, McCarthy discusses Ventura County, California, officials announcing that COVID-infected patients may be forced to leave their homes if others in the residence test negative and there is only one bathroom. Is that constitutional? And what does it say about how governments are responding to this crisis?
Don't miss McCarthy's insights on these two critical issues.No'The Wake-Up Call for Americans'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/whiteheadIn recent days, police in Texas brought out an MRAP and deployed a SWAT team after a bar owner defied the governor's order to stay closed and recruited some armed citizens to help her. NYPD officers were filmed tackling social distancing violators to the sidewalk. Multiple parents have been arrested for playing with their kids in closed parks.

Rutherford Institute President John Whitehead says the lockdown orders and how they are being enforced ought to be a wake-up call for all Americans that our first, fourth, and fifth amendment rights.

Whitehead explain why he thinks we're moving uncomfortably close to martial law in parts of the country and that heavy-handed police tactics are now used to stop people from doing anything the government doesn't like, regardless of whether it's constitutional.

Whitehead also details what role he believes police should be playing in our communities and what citizens can do to improve things.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/26852298Wed, 06 May 2020 22:03:08 +0000Radio AmericaAs the coronavirus restriction ease faster in some places than others, stories are emerging of disturbing confrontations between police and the public.
In recent days, police in Texas brought out an MRAP and deployed a SWAT team after a bar owner...In recent days, police in Texas brought out an MRAP and deployed a SWAT team after a bar owner defied the governor's order to stay closed and recruited some armed citizens to help her. NYPD officers were filmed tackling social distancing violators to the sidewalk. Multiple parents have been arrested for playing with their kids in closed parks.

Rutherford Institute President John Whitehead says the lockdown orders and how they are being enforced ought to be a wake-up call for all Americans that our first, fourth, and fifth amendment rights.

Whitehead explain why he thinks we're moving uncomfortably close to martial law in parts of the country and that heavy-handed police tactics are now used to stop people from doing anything the government doesn't like, regardless of whether it's constitutional.

Whitehead also details what role he believes police should be playing in our communities and what citizens can do to improve things.]]>633news,business,constitution,police,restrictions,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaAs the coronavirus restriction ease faster in some places than others, stories are emerging of disturbing confrontations between police and the public.
In recent days, police in Texas brought out an MRAP and deployed a SWAT team after a bar owner defied the governor's order to stay closed and recruited some armed citizens to help her. NYPD officers were filmed tackling social distancing violators to the sidewalk. Multiple parents have been arrested for playing with their kids in closed parks.
Rutherford Institute President John Whitehead says the lockdown orders and how they are being enforced ought to be a wake-up call for all Americans that our first, fourth, and fifth amendment rights.
Whitehead explain why he thinks we're moving uncomfortably close to martial law in parts of the country and that heavy-handed police tactics are now used to stop people from doing anything the government doesn't like, regardless of whether it's constitutional.
Whitehead also details what role he believes police should be playing in our communities and what citizens can do to improve things.NoEx-Deputy National Security Adviser: 'They Were Trying to Blackmail Me'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mcfarlandThe news comes as no surprise to K.T. McFarland, who served as deputy national security adviser under Flynn, who says federal agents were looking to pin a crime on Flynn and President Trump where there was none The FBI also put the heat on McFarland to give up information it could use to incriminate Flynn or Trump.

In an interview, with Radio America's Greg Corombos, McFarland says the FBI set a perjury trap for Flynn and she knows what one looks like because they tried to set one for her too.

"They were trying to blackmail Gen. Flynn. They were trying to blackmail me to either admit guilt to crimes we did not commit or to implicate others. In my case, it was to implicate Flynn or to implicate President Trump in crimes I didn't think they had committed," said McFarland.

She says the FBI tried to nab her in a perjury trap. And how does a perjury trap work?

"They control all your files, all your text messages, phone logs, emails. They have them. You don't have them. They have them and they let you see a little bit here and a little bit there and then they quiz you on it.

"If you make any kind of mistake, you get the wrong date, you say, 'I think that was Tuesday night' and it was really Wednesday morning, then they can jump and say, 'Well, you should have known that. We think you're lying. Therefore, you're committing perjury," said McFarland.

Listen to the full podcast to hear the two reasons the FBI and intelligence community wanted Flynn out of the White House, what crimes the FBI wanted McFarland and others to point them too, and what needs to happen to make sure these sorts of tactics don't happen again.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/26453640Thu, 30 Apr 2020 21:35:42 +0000Radio AmericaOn Wednesday, handwritten notes concerning Trump National Security Adviser Gen. Michael Flynn revealed FBI agents were approaching their January 2017 interview with Flynn for the purposes of trying to prosecute him or get him fired.
The news comes as...The news comes as no surprise to K.T. McFarland, who served as deputy national security adviser under Flynn, who says federal agents were looking to pin a crime on Flynn and President Trump where there was none The FBI also put the heat on McFarland to give up information it could use to incriminate Flynn or Trump.

In an interview, with Radio America's Greg Corombos, McFarland says the FBI set a perjury trap for Flynn and she knows what one looks like because they tried to set one for her too.

"They were trying to blackmail Gen. Flynn. They were trying to blackmail me to either admit guilt to crimes we did not commit or to implicate others. In my case, it was to implicate Flynn or to implicate President Trump in crimes I didn't think they had committed," said McFarland.

She says the FBI tried to nab her in a perjury trap. And how does a perjury trap work?

"They control all your files, all your text messages, phone logs, emails. They have them. You don't have them. They have them and they let you see a little bit here and a little bit there and then they quiz you on it.

"If you make any kind of mistake, you get the wrong date, you say, 'I think that was Tuesday night' and it was really Wednesday morning, then they can jump and say, 'Well, you should have known that. We think you're lying. Therefore, you're committing perjury," said McFarland.

Listen to the full podcast to hear the two reasons the FBI and intelligence community wanted Flynn out of the White House, what crimes the FBI wanted McFarland and others to point them too, and what needs to happen to make sure these sorts of tactics don't happen again.]]>1071news,flynn,trump,intelligence,russia,fbi,perjurycleanfullRadio AmericaOn Wednesday, handwritten notes concerning Trump National Security Adviser Gen. Michael Flynn revealed FBI agents were approaching their January 2017 interview with Flynn for the purposes of trying to prosecute him or get him fired.
The news comes as no surprise to K.T. McFarland, who served as deputy national security adviser under Flynn, who says federal agents were looking to pin a crime on Flynn and President Trump where there was none The FBI also put the heat on McFarland to give up information it could use to incriminate Flynn or Trump.
In an interview, with Radio America's Greg Corombos, McFarland says the FBI set a perjury trap for Flynn and she knows what one looks like because they tried to set one for her too.
"They were trying to blackmail Gen. Flynn. They were trying to blackmail me to either admit guilt to crimes we did not commit or to implicate others. In my case, it was to implicate Flynn or to implicate President Trump in crimes I didn't think they had committed," said McFarland.
She says the FBI tried to nab her in a perjury trap. And how does a perjury trap work?
"They control all your files, all your text messages, phone logs, emails. They have them. You don't have them. They have them and they let you see a little bit here and a little bit there and then they quiz you on it.
"If you make any kind of mistake, you get the wrong date, you say, 'I think that was Tuesday night' and it was really Wednesday morning, then they can jump and say, 'Well, you should have known that. We think you're lying. Therefore, you're committing perjury," said McFarland.
Listen to the full podcast to hear the two reasons the FBI and intelligence community wanted Flynn out of the White House, what crimes the FBI wanted McFarland and others to point them too, and what needs to happen to make sure these sorts of tactics don't happen again.NoDouble Standards: Comparing Media Coverage of Biden & Kavanaugh Allegationshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/severino_1This approach from the media looks a lot different than the feeding frenzy that took place in September 2018, when the media went rifling through Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's past after Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of assaulting her in the early 1980's.

Even with Ford unable to name the location or the year of her alleged assault and none of the supposed witnesses backing up her story, the media waged a relentless effort to find a pattern of such conduct by Kavanaugh - even giving credence to assertions that he was a gang rapist.

So what are we learning about the media and some politicians who seem to have very different standards for such accusations, depending upon the circumstances? And what is the responsible way for the media to approach any story like this?

We get answers from Judicial Crisis Network President Carrie Severino, co-author of the #1 bestseller "Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Court."]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/26386106Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:45:42 +0000Radio AmericaFive weeks ago, Tara Reade, a former Senate staffer for Joe Biden, accused the likely Democratic presidential nominee of a 1993 sexual assault. Despite the emergence of information that seems to provide some corroboration for the charge, no Biden...This approach from the media looks a lot different than the feeding frenzy that took place in September 2018, when the media went rifling through Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's past after Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of assaulting her in the early 1980's.

Even with Ford unable to name the location or the year of her alleged assault and none of the supposed witnesses backing up her story, the media waged a relentless effort to find a pattern of such conduct by Kavanaugh - even giving credence to assertions that he was a gang rapist.

So what are we learning about the media and some politicians who seem to have very different standards for such accusations, depending upon the circumstances? And what is the responsible way for the media to approach any story like this?

We get answers from Judicial Crisis Network President Carrie Severino, co-author of the #1 bestseller "Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Court."]]>659news,media,ford,biden,accusations,reade,kavanaughcleanfullRadio AmericaFive weeks ago, Tara Reade, a former Senate staffer for Joe Biden, accused the likely Democratic presidential nominee of a 1993 sexual assault. Despite the emergence of information that seems to provide some corroboration for the charge, no Biden surrogate had not been asked about the matter until this week. Biden still has not been asked.
This approach from the media looks a lot different than the feeding frenzy that took place in September 2018, when the media went rifling through Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's past after Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of assaulting her in the early 1980's.
Even with Ford unable to name the location or the year of her alleged assault and none of the supposed witnesses backing up her story, the media waged a relentless effort to find a pattern of such conduct by Kavanaugh - even giving credence to assertions that he was a gang rapist.
So what are we learning about the media and some politicians who seem to have very different standards for such accusations, depending upon the circumstances? And what is the responsible way for the media to approach any story like this?
We get answers from Judicial Crisis Network President Carrie Severino, co-author of the #1 bestseller "Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Court."NoWhat Coronavirus Modeling Tells Us About the Climate Debatehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/horner_2Christopher C. Horner served on President Trump's landing team at the Environmental Protection Agency during the presidential transition in late 2016 and early 2017. Hormer also spent 20 years at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and is now an attorney and board member at Government Accountability and Oversight.

Horner says models have two areas ripe for intentional or unintentional manipulation - the assumptions built into the models and the quality of the data fed into them.

"If you want carbon dioxide to be a control knob, then you build that into your model. That's an assumption. And you can have other assumptions about the impact of clouds as you believe it to be or sun.

"Even the UN says, 'Well, we don't quite know the sun's impact on climate.' So, maybe come back to me when you do. That seems like a big one," said Horner.

Horner says the rapidly fluctuating coronavirus infection and death projections even while consistently assuming social distancing and other mitigation efforts shows climate models are anything but predictive for decades or centuries from now.

In this podcast interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Horner explains how the coronavirus response is a red flag for those considering dramatic economic action on the climate but he also explains how the two issues are different in very significant ways - and that climate models even admit their sweeping proposals wouldn't accomplish anything.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/26229772Mon, 27 Apr 2020 21:49:12 +0000Radio AmericaMany different models of coronavirus infections and deaths are constantly in the news, and one promiment voice in the debate says the speed with which the models change gives us a very good look at the flaws in climate modeling and the "extreme"...Christopher C. Horner served on President Trump's landing team at the Environmental Protection Agency during the presidential transition in late 2016 and early 2017. Hormer also spent 20 years at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and is now an attorney and board member at Government Accountability and Oversight.

Horner says models have two areas ripe for intentional or unintentional manipulation - the assumptions built into the models and the quality of the data fed into them.

"If you want carbon dioxide to be a control knob, then you build that into your model. That's an assumption. And you can have other assumptions about the impact of clouds as you believe it to be or sun.

"Even the UN says, 'Well, we don't quite know the sun's impact on climate.' So, maybe come back to me when you do. That seems like a big one," said Horner.

Horner says the rapidly fluctuating coronavirus infection and death projections even while consistently assuming social distancing and other mitigation efforts shows climate models are anything but predictive for decades or centuries from now.

In this podcast interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Horner explains how the coronavirus response is a red flag for those considering dramatic economic action on the climate but he also explains how the two issues are different in very significant ways - and that climate models even admit their sweeping proposals wouldn't accomplish anything.]]>821news,economy,climate,assumptions,modeling,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaMany different models of coronavirus infections and deaths are constantly in the news, and one promiment voice in the debate says the speed with which the models change gives us a very good look at the flaws in climate modeling and the "extreme" solutions being offered by advocates of the Green New Deal and other proposals.
Christopher C. Horner served on President Trump's landing team at the Environmental Protection Agency during the presidential transition in late 2016 and early 2017. Hormer also spent 20 years at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and is now an attorney and board member at Government Accountability and Oversight.
Horner says models have two areas ripe for intentional or unintentional manipulation - the assumptions built into the models and the quality of the data fed into them.
"If you want carbon dioxide to be a control knob, then you build that into your model. That's an assumption. And you can have other assumptions about the impact of clouds as you believe it to be or sun.
"Even the UN says, 'Well, we don't quite know the sun's impact on climate.' So, maybe come back to me when you do. That seems like a big one," said Horner.
Horner says the rapidly fluctuating coronavirus infection and death projections even while consistently assuming social distancing and other mitigation efforts shows climate models are anything but predictive for decades or centuries from now.
In this podcast interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Horner explains how the coronavirus response is a red flag for those considering dramatic economic action on the climate but he also explains how the two issues are different in very significant ways - and that climate models even admit their sweeping proposals wouldn't accomplish anything.NoWhat Will Be the Economic Toll from COVID-19?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/wesbury_2What are the short-term and long-term economic impacts of this hemorrhaging of jobs, productivity, and revenue? How much has the Paycheck Protection Program helped? And how aggressively can our economy re-engage when we're already hearing some schools may not be opening in the fall and the Centers for Disease Control believes the coronavirus could be worse in the coming winter than it is now?

Brian Wesbury is chief economist at First Trust Advisors in Wheaton, Illinois, and formerly served as chief economist for the Joint Economic Committee of Congress. He walks us through these difficult questions, explains the indicators for and against a rise in inflation, and sizes up the recent volatility in the oil markets.

Don't miss this critical conversation on the state of our economy.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25975945Thu, 23 Apr 2020 22:20:21 +0000Radio AmericaOn Thursday, the Department of Labor reported more than 4.4 million jobs lost in the past week. Over the past five weeks, 26.4 million people have filed first-time jobless claims.
What are the short-term and long-term economic impacts of this...What are the short-term and long-term economic impacts of this hemorrhaging of jobs, productivity, and revenue? How much has the Paycheck Protection Program helped? And how aggressively can our economy re-engage when we're already hearing some schools may not be opening in the fall and the Centers for Disease Control believes the coronavirus could be worse in the coming winter than it is now?

Brian Wesbury is chief economist at First Trust Advisors in Wheaton, Illinois, and formerly served as chief economist for the Joint Economic Committee of Congress. He walks us through these difficult questions, explains the indicators for and against a rise in inflation, and sizes up the recent volatility in the oil markets.

Don't miss this critical conversation on the state of our economy.]]>917news,economy,jobs,oil,inflation,revenue,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaOn Thursday, the Department of Labor reported more than 4.4 million jobs lost in the past week. Over the past five weeks, 26.4 million people have filed first-time jobless claims.
What are the short-term and long-term economic impacts of this hemorrhaging of jobs, productivity, and revenue? How much has the Paycheck Protection Program helped? And how aggressively can our economy re-engage when we're already hearing some schools may not be opening in the fall and the Centers for Disease Control believes the coronavirus could be worse in the coming winter than it is now?
Brian Wesbury is chief economist at First Trust Advisors in Wheaton, Illinois, and formerly served as chief economist for the Joint Economic Committee of Congress. He walks us through these difficult questions, explains the indicators for and against a rise in inflation, and sizes up the recent volatility in the oil markets.
Don't miss this critical conversation on the state of our economy.NoChang Talks Korean Kim Confusion, Chinese Coronavirus Tacticshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/chang_9China and North Korea expert Gordon G. Chang is not so sure. In a conversation with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Chang says Kim's absence at major events last week raises serious red flags and explains why it might take awhile before North Korea would ever confirm Kim's death or incapacitation.

China's veracity is clearly under a lot of scrutiny these days, but most foreign policy experts see no reason to doubt the South Korean denials of Kim's dire health. Chang disagrees and tells us why South Korea's aggressive public relations efforts actually raise more doubts in his mind.

Chang and Corombos then discuss what succession looks like in North Korea, how the U.S. would approach a change at the head of a nuclear nation and more. They also discuss ways China is seeking to exploit the worldwide concerns over the coronavirus.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25918974Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:49:24 +0000Radio AmericaEarlier this week, CNN and NBC News both reported that North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un was in grave condition and possibly even brain dead. That reporting was soon denied by China and South Korea and the world largely accepted that this was a false...China and North Korea expert Gordon G. Chang is not so sure. In a conversation with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Chang says Kim's absence at major events last week raises serious red flags and explains why it might take awhile before North Korea would ever confirm Kim's death or incapacitation.

China's veracity is clearly under a lot of scrutiny these days, but most foreign policy experts see no reason to doubt the South Korean denials of Kim's dire health. Chang disagrees and tells us why South Korea's aggressive public relations efforts actually raise more doubts in his mind.

Chang and Corombos then discuss what succession looks like in North Korea, how the U.S. would approach a change at the head of a nuclear nation and more. They also discuss ways China is seeking to exploit the worldwide concerns over the coronavirus.]]>613nuclear,china,korea,kim,chang,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaEarlier this week, CNN and NBC News both reported that North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un was in grave condition and possibly even brain dead. That reporting was soon denied by China and South Korea and the world largely accepted that this was a false alarm.
China and North Korea expert Gordon G. Chang is not so sure. In a conversation with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Chang says Kim's absence at major events last week raises serious red flags and explains why it might take awhile before North Korea would ever confirm Kim's death or incapacitation.
China's veracity is clearly under a lot of scrutiny these days, but most foreign policy experts see no reason to doubt the South Korean denials of Kim's dire health. Chang disagrees and tells us why South Korea's aggressive public relations efforts actually raise more doubts in his mind.
Chang and Corombos then discuss what succession looks like in North Korea, how the U.S. would approach a change at the head of a nuclear nation and more. They also discuss ways China is seeking to exploit the worldwide concerns over the coronavirus.NoSupremes Demand Unanimous Verdicts for Convictionshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_18"Wherever we might look to determine what the term 'trial by an impartial jury trial' meant at the time of the Sixth Amendment’s adoption—whether it’s the common law, state practices in the founding era, or opinions and treatises written soon afterward—the answer is unmistakable," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in an opinion. "A jury must reach a unanimous verdict in order to convict."

So how did Louisiana and Oregon wind up with laws not requiring unanimous verdicts for convictions and why did three justices rule in favor of the existing laws?

We ask Andrew C. McCarthy, former chief assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. We also discuss the push to release prisoners in many parts of the country to mitigate the spread of coronavirus and the inexplicable surprise by some local officials when the freed inmates commit more crimes.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25814360Mon, 20 Apr 2020 21:19:54 +0000Radio AmericaThe U.S. Supreme Court Monday ruled that criminal jury verdicts must be unanimous to result in convictions, a decision addressing laws in Oregon and Louisiana that allowed convictions even with two jurors voting to acquit.
"Wherever we might look to..."Wherever we might look to determine what the term 'trial by an impartial jury trial' meant at the time of the Sixth Amendment’s adoption—whether it’s the common law, state practices in the founding era, or opinions and treatises written soon afterward—the answer is unmistakable," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in an opinion. "A jury must reach a unanimous verdict in order to convict."

So how did Louisiana and Oregon wind up with laws not requiring unanimous verdicts for convictions and why did three justices rule in favor of the existing laws?

We ask Andrew C. McCarthy, former chief assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. We also discuss the push to release prisoners in many parts of the country to mitigate the spread of coronavirus and the inexplicable surprise by some local officials when the freed inmates commit more crimes.]]>915news,prisoners,scotus,juries,coronavirus,gorsuchcleanfullRadio AmericaThe U.S. Supreme Court Monday ruled that criminal jury verdicts must be unanimous to result in convictions, a decision addressing laws in Oregon and Louisiana that allowed convictions even with two jurors voting to acquit.
"Wherever we might look to determine what the term 'trial by an impartial jury trial' meant at the time of the Sixth Amendment’s adoption—whether it’s the common law, state practices in the founding era, or opinions and treatises written soon afterward—the answer is unmistakable," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in an opinion. "A jury must reach a unanimous verdict in order to convict."
So how did Louisiana and Oregon wind up with laws not requiring unanimous verdicts for convictions and why did three justices rule in favor of the existing laws?
We ask Andrew C. McCarthy, former chief assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. We also discuss the push to release prisoners in many parts of the country to mitigate the spread of coronavirus and the inexplicable surprise by some local officials when the freed inmates commit more crimes.NoTrump vs. WHO & the Beauty of Federalismhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/turner_10On Thursday, President Trump laid out his three-phase plan to restart the U.S. economy. It provides criteria for starting the three phases all the way up to a fully re-engaged society. It also leaves the opening and closing power with governors.

Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner weighs in eloquently on both subjects. Turner explains why the WHO must be confronted now and why we cannot wait until after the crisis has largely subsided. She also details what the WHO could do right now to prove it's more than an apologist for China.

Turner also hails the plan to restart the economy, with special praise for the federalist approach of giving states the flexibility to make their own decisions on reopening.

Although she isn't expecting any changes in the traditional health policy debates, Turner says this newfound respect for states rights ought to be applied to our health care system as a whole.

"All the things that Washington loves to control by rules and regulations, we've seen the health sector actually functions better if we get those out of the way," said Turner, who says other aspects of the coronavirus response prove her point as well.

"When we have seen good responses to needs, we have seen the private sector stepping up: coming up with tests, producing supplies, turning automobile factories over to be able to produce ventilators. Where we have seen failures, it's been in central controlled government programs," added Turner.

Listen to the full podcast to hear where Turner believes the government dropped the ball and more of her analysis on both of these key issues.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25655387Fri, 17 Apr 2020 21:46:30 +0000Radio AmericaThis week, President Trump temporarily defunding the World Health Organization over its failure to confront China over its deceptions or even do any work to confirm the information China was trying to spoon feed to the rest of the world.
On...On Thursday, President Trump laid out his three-phase plan to restart the U.S. economy. It provides criteria for starting the three phases all the way up to a fully re-engaged society. It also leaves the opening and closing power with governors.

Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner weighs in eloquently on both subjects. Turner explains why the WHO must be confronted now and why we cannot wait until after the crisis has largely subsided. She also details what the WHO could do right now to prove it's more than an apologist for China.

Turner also hails the plan to restart the economy, with special praise for the federalist approach of giving states the flexibility to make their own decisions on reopening.

Although she isn't expecting any changes in the traditional health policy debates, Turner says this newfound respect for states rights ought to be applied to our health care system as a whole.

"All the things that Washington loves to control by rules and regulations, we've seen the health sector actually functions better if we get those out of the way," said Turner, who says other aspects of the coronavirus response prove her point as well.

"When we have seen good responses to needs, we have seen the private sector stepping up: coming up with tests, producing supplies, turning automobile factories over to be able to produce ventilators. Where we have seen failures, it's been in central controlled government programs," added Turner.

Listen to the full podcast to hear where Turner believes the government dropped the ball and more of her analysis on both of these key issues.]]>955who,economy,health,trump,federalism,coronavirus,covidcleanfullRadio AmericaThis week, President Trump temporarily defunding the World Health Organization over its failure to confront China over its deceptions or even do any work to confirm the information China was trying to spoon feed to the rest of the world.
On Thursday, President Trump laid out his three-phase plan to restart the U.S. economy. It provides criteria for starting the three phases all the way up to a fully re-engaged society. It also leaves the opening and closing power with governors.
Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner weighs in eloquently on both subjects. Turner explains why the WHO must be confronted now and why we cannot wait until after the crisis has largely subsided. She also details what the WHO could do right now to prove it's more than an apologist for China.
Turner also hails the plan to restart the economy, with special praise for the federalist approach of giving states the flexibility to make their own decisions on reopening.
Although she isn't expecting any changes in the traditional health policy debates, Turner says this newfound respect for states rights ought to be applied to our health care system as a whole.
"All the things that Washington loves to control by rules and regulations, we've seen the health sector actually functions better if we get those out of the way," said Turner, who says other aspects of the coronavirus response prove her point as well.
"When we have seen good responses to needs, we have seen the private sector stepping up: coming up with tests, producing supplies, turning automobile factories over to be able to produce ventilators. Where we have seen failures, it's been in central controlled government programs," added Turner.
Listen to the full podcast to hear where Turner believes the government dropped the ball and more of her analysis on both of these key issues.NoThe Real Phyllis Schlafly: Hollywood vs. Realityhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/coriWednesday night, F/X and Hulu are teaming up to present "Mrs. America," a multi-part examination of the battle over the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970's and 1980's. Unsurprisingly, the Hollywood story line is that the amendment was a good thing and Mrs. Schlafly was wrong to oppose it.

According to Schlafly's daughter Anne Schlafly Cori, "Mrs. America" gets her mother's hair and wardrobe exactly right but fails to capture her warmth and ability to inspire thousands of women. It also badly mischaracterizes the Schlafly marriage.

In this podcast, Schlafly Cori explains why her mother jumped in to lead the fight against the ERA, what she thinks of efforts by Democrats to claim they've ratified the amendment long after the window of opportunity expired, and why she thinks the resurgence is all about abortion.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25579248Wed, 15 Apr 2020 20:56:21 +0000Radio AmericaIn the 1970's the Equal Rights Amendment was on its way to swift ratification, when a woman named Phyllis Schlafly launched a grassroots effort to torpedo the amendment by showing women why they didn't want it.
Wednesday night, F/X and Hulu are...Wednesday night, F/X and Hulu are teaming up to present "Mrs. America," a multi-part examination of the battle over the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970's and 1980's. Unsurprisingly, the Hollywood story line is that the amendment was a good thing and Mrs. Schlafly was wrong to oppose it.

According to Schlafly's daughter Anne Schlafly Cori, "Mrs. America" gets her mother's hair and wardrobe exactly right but fails to capture her warmth and ability to inspire thousands of women. It also badly mischaracterizes the Schlafly marriage.

In this podcast, Schlafly Cori explains why her mother jumped in to lead the fight against the ERA, what she thinks of efforts by Democrats to claim they've ratified the amendment long after the window of opportunity expired, and why she thinks the resurgence is all about abortion.]]>463news,era,abortion,schlaflycleanfullRadio AmericaIn the 1970's the Equal Rights Amendment was on its way to swift ratification, when a woman named Phyllis Schlafly launched a grassroots effort to torpedo the amendment by showing women why they didn't want it.
Wednesday night, F/X and Hulu are teaming up to present "Mrs. America," a multi-part examination of the battle over the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970's and 1980's. Unsurprisingly, the Hollywood story line is that the amendment was a good thing and Mrs. Schlafly was wrong to oppose it.
According to Schlafly's daughter Anne Schlafly Cori, "Mrs. America" gets her mother's hair and wardrobe exactly right but fails to capture her warmth and ability to inspire thousands of women. It also badly mischaracterizes the Schlafly marriage.
In this podcast, Schlafly Cori explains why her mother jumped in to lead the fight against the ERA, what she thinks of efforts by Democrats to claim they've ratified the amendment long after the window of opportunity expired, and why she thinks the resurgence is all about abortion.NoWhy Virginia's New Gun Control Laws Make Citizens Less Safehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/crumpThe new legislation requires universal background checks, limits citizens to one firearm purchase per month, established "red flag" laws allowing police to take firearms away from people alleged to be a threat to themselves or others, and gives localities the freedom to establish gun-free zones.

John Crump is Virginia State Director at Gun Owners of America. In this podcast, he explains which of the new laws bother him the most, why universal background checks give the government information he believes they have no business having, and why he fears red flag laws will be highly abused to deny people their constitutional rights.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25502867Tue, 14 Apr 2020 21:48:17 +0000Radio AmericaOn Friday, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam signed several gun control bills into law, and while he did not get his prized "assault weapons" ban, gun rights groups say second amendment rights in the commonwealth are greatly weakened by these new laws.
The...The new legislation requires universal background checks, limits citizens to one firearm purchase per month, established "red flag" laws allowing police to take firearms away from people alleged to be a threat to themselves or others, and gives localities the freedom to establish gun-free zones.

John Crump is Virginia State Director at Gun Owners of America. In this podcast, he explains which of the new laws bother him the most, why universal background checks give the government information he believes they have no business having, and why he fears red flag laws will be highly abused to deny people their constitutional rights.]]>490news,guns,virginia,checks,northamcleanfullRadio AmericaOn Friday, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam signed several gun control bills into law, and while he did not get his prized "assault weapons" ban, gun rights groups say second amendment rights in the commonwealth are greatly weakened by these new laws.
The new legislation requires universal background checks, limits citizens to one firearm purchase per month, established "red flag" laws allowing police to take firearms away from people alleged to be a threat to themselves or others, and gives localities the freedom to establish gun-free zones.
John Crump is Virginia State Director at Gun Owners of America. In this podcast, he explains which of the new laws bother him the most, why universal background checks give the government information he believes they have no business having, and why he fears red flag laws will be highly abused to deny people their constitutional rights.NoThe Dangers of Rushing to Vote by Mailhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hans_2Many voting rights activists are now pushing hard for voting by mail to be an option for every voter come November, but some experts say that idea could lead to big problems with election integrity.

President Trump and others contend voting by mail - while available in every state - is more vulnerable to fraud than in-person voting.

Hans von Spakovsky served on the Federal Election Commission, on President Trump's commission on election integrity, and manages the Election Law Reform Initiative at the Heritage Foundation. In this podcast, von Spakovsky explains why he thinks this push is premature, why House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's approach to voting by mail would be an election integrity nightmare, and why voting by mail does open up the most opportunities for mischief.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25249361Fri, 10 Apr 2020 19:29:32 +0000Radio AmericaConcerns over the coronavirus have forced the postponement of several political primaries and Wisconsin recently served as the focal point of a bitter debate over in-person voting during a health crisis.
Many voting rights activists are now pushing...Many voting rights activists are now pushing hard for voting by mail to be an option for every voter come November, but some experts say that idea could lead to big problems with election integrity.

President Trump and others contend voting by mail - while available in every state - is more vulnerable to fraud than in-person voting.

Hans von Spakovsky served on the Federal Election Commission, on President Trump's commission on election integrity, and manages the Election Law Reform Initiative at the Heritage Foundation. In this podcast, von Spakovsky explains why he thinks this push is premature, why House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's approach to voting by mail would be an election integrity nightmare, and why voting by mail does open up the most opportunities for mischief.]]>585news,mail,elections,pelosi,covid-19cleanfullRadio AmericaConcerns over the coronavirus have forced the postponement of several political primaries and Wisconsin recently served as the focal point of a bitter debate over in-person voting during a health crisis.
Many voting rights activists are now pushing hard for voting by mail to be an option for every voter come November, but some experts say that idea could lead to big problems with election integrity.
President Trump and others contend voting by mail - while available in every state - is more vulnerable to fraud than in-person voting.
Hans von Spakovsky served on the Federal Election Commission, on President Trump's commission on election integrity, and manages the Election Law Reform Initiative at the Heritage Foundation. In this podcast, von Spakovsky explains why he thinks this push is premature, why House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's approach to voting by mail would be an election integrity nightmare, and why voting by mail does open up the most opportunities for mischief.NoHow Long Can We Afford to Keep the Economy Shuttered?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/wolfram_1How much longer can our economy afford to be locked down? How fast can it get up and running once it is restarted? And what policies will be most helpful?

Dr. Gary Wolfram teaches political economy at Hillsdale College. He addresses these questions, explains why strong government action is needed in a crisis like this, and why suggestions by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel and others that we need to ban large gatherings for 12-18 months is simply unrealistic.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25168568Thu, 09 Apr 2020 21:37:56 +0000Radio AmericaOn Thursday, the Labor Department announced 6.6 million people filed for first-time unemployment last week. In the past three weeks, more than 16 million Americans lost their jobs.
How much longer can our economy afford to be locked down? How fast...How much longer can our economy afford to be locked down? How fast can it get up and running once it is restarted? And what policies will be most helpful?

Dr. Gary Wolfram teaches political economy at Hillsdale College. He addresses these questions, explains why strong government action is needed in a crisis like this, and why suggestions by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel and others that we need to ban large gatherings for 12-18 months is simply unrealistic.]]>662news,economy,jobs,covid-19cleanfullRadio AmericaOn Thursday, the Labor Department announced 6.6 million people filed for first-time unemployment last week. In the past three weeks, more than 16 million Americans lost their jobs.
How much longer can our economy afford to be locked down? How fast can it get up and running once it is restarted? And what policies will be most helpful?
Dr. Gary Wolfram teaches political economy at Hillsdale College. He addresses these questions, explains why strong government action is needed in a crisis like this, and why suggestions by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel and others that we need to ban large gatherings for 12-18 months is simply unrealistic.NoWhy Pelosi Wants A Special Coronavirus Committeehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_17https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25059940Wed, 08 Apr 2020 21:05:17 +0000Radio AmericaFormer federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy explains why he thinks the creation of a special, 9/11-style commission to investigate the federal response to the coronavirus threat is a bad idea right now and why these commissions rarely live up to the...452news,congress,pelosi,investigations,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaFormer federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy explains why he thinks the creation of a special, 9/11-style commission to investigate the federal response to the coronavirus threat is a bad idea right now and why these commissions rarely live up to the hype.NoIran's Horrific Coronavirus Responsehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/alireza_6Alireza Jafarzadeh is deputy director of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. He says the response to the virus has been nothing short of appalling.

According to Jafarzadeh, the regime denied the virus existed in the country for three weeks and kept flights to and from China at a robust pace. He says the mullahs and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps are stockpiling vital medical supplies. Instead of distributing them to the medical professionals or the public, they are giving preference to proxy groups in other countries and selling other materials to the highest bidders.

He says there is no urgency in helping the public, only on how to maximize profits from the crisis.

"This is a regime that intervenes in the most personal aspects of the life of the citizen. You can't even have a party in your own home," said Jafarzadeh. "Yet, when there is a crisis this big, the regime is nowhere to be found."

Listen to Jafarzadeh's full discussion with Radio America's Greg Corombos as he explains why sanctions relief is not necessary to help the people of Iran and why the demand for regime change will be greater than ever once this crisis is over.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24896863Mon, 06 Apr 2020 20:58:16 +0000Radio AmericaIran was one of the first nations afflicted with Coronavirus after it moved on from China, but the Iranian regime's callous indifference and calculated cruelty towards its own people could result in much bigger consequences than the virus might...Alireza Jafarzadeh is deputy director of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. He says the response to the virus has been nothing short of appalling.

According to Jafarzadeh, the regime denied the virus existed in the country for three weeks and kept flights to and from China at a robust pace. He says the mullahs and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps are stockpiling vital medical supplies. Instead of distributing them to the medical professionals or the public, they are giving preference to proxy groups in other countries and selling other materials to the highest bidders.

He says there is no urgency in helping the public, only on how to maximize profits from the crisis.

"This is a regime that intervenes in the most personal aspects of the life of the citizen. You can't even have a party in your own home," said Jafarzadeh. "Yet, when there is a crisis this big, the regime is nowhere to be found."

Listen to Jafarzadeh's full discussion with Radio America's Greg Corombos as he explains why sanctions relief is not necessary to help the people of Iran and why the demand for regime change will be greater than ever once this crisis is over.]]>950news,china,iran,rouhani,irgc,covid-19cleanfullRadio AmericaIran was one of the first nations afflicted with Coronavirus after it moved on from China, but the Iranian regime's callous indifference and calculated cruelty towards its own people could result in much bigger consequences than the virus might inflict.
Alireza Jafarzadeh is deputy director of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. He says the response to the virus has been nothing short of appalling.
According to Jafarzadeh, the regime denied the virus existed in the country for three weeks and kept flights to and from China at a robust pace. He says the mullahs and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps are stockpiling vital medical supplies. Instead of distributing them to the medical professionals or the public, they are giving preference to proxy groups in other countries and selling other materials to the highest bidders.
He says there is no urgency in helping the public, only on how to maximize profits from the crisis.
"This is a regime that intervenes in the most personal aspects of the life of the citizen. You can't even have a party in your own home," said Jafarzadeh. "Yet, when there is a crisis this big, the regime is nowhere to be found."
Listen to Jafarzadeh's full discussion with Radio America's Greg Corombos as he explains why sanctions relief is not necessary to help the people of Iran and why the demand for regime change will be greater than ever once this crisis is over.NoThe Economy: How Bad Will It Get & How Do We Turn It Around?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/wesbury_1With the nation effectively on pause at least through April, what will the economic toll be over the next few weeks and how quickly can those losses be reversed once we're past the crisis?

Brian Wesbury is chief economist at First Trust Advisors and is a former chief economist for the Joint Economic of Congress. He explains where he thinks our economy is headed, how strong the relief bill from Congress is and what the big economic lessons ought to be from this crisis.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24756611Thu, 02 Apr 2020 21:24:02 +0000Radio AmericaOn Thursday, the Department of Labor reported more than 6.6 million people filed new jobless claims over the past week. Combined with the nearly 3.3 million from last week, more than 10 million people since our economy largely shut down due to the...With the nation effectively on pause at least through April, what will the economic toll be over the next few weeks and how quickly can those losses be reversed once we're past the crisis?

Brian Wesbury is chief economist at First Trust Advisors and is a former chief economist for the Joint Economic of Congress. He explains where he thinks our economy is headed, how strong the relief bill from Congress is and what the big economic lessons ought to be from this crisis.]]>795news,economy,jobs,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaOn Thursday, the Department of Labor reported more than 6.6 million people filed new jobless claims over the past week. Combined with the nearly 3.3 million from last week, more than 10 million people since our economy largely shut down due to the coronavirus.
With the nation effectively on pause at least through April, what will the economic toll be over the next few weeks and how quickly can those losses be reversed once we're past the crisis?
Brian Wesbury is chief economist at First Trust Advisors and is a former chief economist for the Joint Economic of Congress. He explains where he thinks our economy is headed, how strong the relief bill from Congress is and what the big economic lessons ought to be from this crisis.NoWhat Price Should China Pay?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/chang_8Is there any question China is lying? What does it gain from these deceptions when the lies are so obvious? What does the poor Chinese response to the virus tell us abut the regime in general? And what should be the immediate and long-term U.S. responses for China needlessly endangering so many lives around the world?

We get answers from Gordon G. Chang, a China expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China."]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24722530Wed, 01 Apr 2020 20:58:02 +0000Radio AmericaTime and time again, China lied about the severity of the coronavirus, how it started, and how many people died there. Now, by all accounts, the communist rulers are lying about there being no new cases.
Is there any question China is lying? What...Is there any question China is lying? What does it gain from these deceptions when the lies are so obvious? What does the poor Chinese response to the virus tell us abut the regime in general? And what should be the immediate and long-term U.S. responses for China needlessly endangering so many lives around the world?

We get answers from Gordon G. Chang, a China expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China."]]>480news,trump,china,lies,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaTime and time again, China lied about the severity of the coronavirus, how it started, and how many people died there. Now, by all accounts, the communist rulers are lying about there being no new cases.
Is there any question China is lying? What does it gain from these deceptions when the lies are so obvious? What does the poor Chinese response to the virus tell us abut the regime in general? And what should be the immediate and long-term U.S. responses for China needlessly endangering so many lives around the world?
We get answers from Gordon G. Chang, a China expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China."NoAssessing the Coronavrus Responsehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/turner_9Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner addresses these questions and more in this interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24687535Tue, 31 Mar 2020 21:18:17 +0000Radio AmericaThe debate over the federal response to the coronavirus threat has been raging for weeks but what goes into a response of this scope? How do the different agencies coordinate, how do the feds collaborate with the states, and how does the private...Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner addresses these questions and more in this interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos.]]>671news,government,business,response,states,covid-19cleanfullRadio AmericaThe debate over the federal response to the coronavirus threat has been raging for weeks but what goes into a response of this scope? How do the different agencies coordinate, how do the feds collaborate with the states, and how does the private sector partner with the government so seamlessly?
Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner addresses these questions and more in this interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos.NoThe Wasteful Spending Inside the Coronavirus Relief Billhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/adam_5For example, the legislation allots $250 million for the IRS, $350 for migration and refugee assistance, $75 million for NPR and PBS, $25 million for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and many others.

So how did this happen and what was happening behind the scenes even as the Senate floor debate was under way? How does House Speaker Nancy Pelosi justify these spending demands from the GOP-led Senate? And how should a fiscally conservative member approach a bill like this when other provisions need to be approved immediately?

We discuss these and other questions with Adam Andrzejewski, founder and CEO of OpentheBooks.com.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24399388Thu, 26 Mar 2020 22:26:48 +0000Radio AmericaThe U.S. Senate unanimously passed a $2 trillion coronavirus relief package Wednesday night and the House is expected to follow suit as soon as Friday. But in addition to the critical relief for families and businesses is a lot of spending that...For example, the legislation allots $250 million for the IRS, $350 for migration and refugee assistance, $75 million for NPR and PBS, $25 million for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and many others.

So how did this happen and what was happening behind the scenes even as the Senate floor debate was under way? How does House Speaker Nancy Pelosi justify these spending demands from the GOP-led Senate? And how should a fiscally conservative member approach a bill like this when other provisions need to be approved immediately?

We discuss these and other questions with Adam Andrzejewski, founder and CEO of OpentheBooks.com.]]>457news,senate,debt,spending,relief,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaThe U.S. Senate unanimously passed a $2 trillion coronavirus relief package Wednesday night and the House is expected to follow suit as soon as Friday. But in addition to the critical relief for families and businesses is a lot of spending that hardly seems relevant to the crisis at hand.
For example, the legislation allots $250 million for the IRS, $350 for migration and refugee assistance, $75 million for NPR and PBS, $25 million for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and many others.
So how did this happen and what was happening behind the scenes even as the Senate floor debate was under way? How does House Speaker Nancy Pelosi justify these spending demands from the GOP-led Senate? And how should a fiscally conservative member approach a bill like this when other provisions need to be approved immediately?
We discuss these and other questions with Adam Andrzejewski, founder and CEO of OpentheBooks.com.NoHow to Protect Our Prescription Drug Supply Chainhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/pittsFormer FDA Associate Commissioner Peter Pitts says there is a way to induce much more domestic production of prescription drugs. In this interview with Greg Corombos, Pitts explains what the federal government would need to do to give drug makers the incentive to move production back home and the major infrastructure investment pharmaceuticals would need to make.

But Pitts also points out that domestic production is more expensive, so how does the tension between price and availability of drugs play out?

Pitts walks us through these key issues and explains the role of the FDA during the current crisis and what it ought to be doing once it is over.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24335787Wed, 25 Mar 2020 21:19:32 +0000Radio AmericaThere's no crisis of prescription drug availability right now as the COVID-19 crisis unfolds, but as supply chains suffer some disruptions and China threatens to withhold medications produced there by U.S. pharmaceuticals, how can we make sure there's...Former FDA Associate Commissioner Peter Pitts says there is a way to induce much more domestic production of prescription drugs. In this interview with Greg Corombos, Pitts explains what the federal government would need to do to give drug makers the incentive to move production back home and the major infrastructure investment pharmaceuticals would need to make.

But Pitts also points out that domestic production is more expensive, so how does the tension between price and availability of drugs play out?

Pitts walks us through these key issues and explains the role of the FDA during the current crisis and what it ought to be doing once it is over.]]>460news,drugs,production,china,fda,covid-19cleanfullRadio AmericaThere's no crisis of prescription drug availability right now as the COVID-19 crisis unfolds, but as supply chains suffer some disruptions and China threatens to withhold medications produced there by U.S. pharmaceuticals, how can we make sure there's never a problem?
Former FDA Associate Commissioner Peter Pitts says there is a way to induce much more domestic production of prescription drugs. In this interview with Greg Corombos, Pitts explains what the federal government would need to do to give drug makers the incentive to move production back home and the major infrastructure investment pharmaceuticals would need to make.
But Pitts also points out that domestic production is more expensive, so how does the tension between price and availability of drugs play out?
Pitts walks us through these key issues and explains the role of the FDA during the current crisis and what it ought to be doing once it is over.No'The Left Is All About the Pursuit of Power'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/3-23-bratOn Monday, the GOP frustrations boiled over as details of the House bill emerged. Pelosi and her allies are looking to add many policy items to the bill that do not seem to have much relevance in the present circumstances.

For example, House Democrats want to greatly expand collective bargaining power for labor unions, implement parts of the Green New Deal, bail out the U.S. Postal Service, and enact national same-day voter registration.

"The left is all about the pursuit of power. They're doing a gun grab. They're coming after the free press. Free speech on campus is under assault. Religion is under assault," said former Virginia Rep. Dave Brat, who is now dean of the Liberty University School of Business.

"You couldn't copy the cookbook any better. The left is just pursuing power for its own sake," said Brat.

In this interview with Greg Corombos, Brat also discusses whether the economic damage inflicted by the coronavirus response could do greater damage than the virus itself. A longtime college economics professor, Brat also weighs in on whether economic relief would be more effective by focusing on helping businesses or putting money directly into the pocket of the American people.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24223274Mon, 23 Mar 2020 21:27:35 +0000Radio AmericaPartisan emotions are at a fevered pitch on Capitol Hill Monday, after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the House Democrats would draft their own bill, effectively derailing bipartisan legislation in the Senate.
On Monday, the GOP frustrations...On Monday, the GOP frustrations boiled over as details of the House bill emerged. Pelosi and her allies are looking to add many policy items to the bill that do not seem to have much relevance in the present circumstances.

For example, House Democrats want to greatly expand collective bargaining power for labor unions, implement parts of the Green New Deal, bail out the U.S. Postal Service, and enact national same-day voter registration.

"The left is all about the pursuit of power. They're doing a gun grab. They're coming after the free press. Free speech on campus is under assault. Religion is under assault," said former Virginia Rep. Dave Brat, who is now dean of the Liberty University School of Business.

"You couldn't copy the cookbook any better. The left is just pursuing power for its own sake," said Brat.

In this interview with Greg Corombos, Brat also discusses whether the economic damage inflicted by the coronavirus response could do greater damage than the virus itself. A longtime college economics professor, Brat also weighs in on whether economic relief would be more effective by focusing on helping businesses or putting money directly into the pocket of the American people.]]>648news,democrats,senate,pelosi,relief,coronavirus,covid-19cleanfullRadio AmericaPartisan emotions are at a fevered pitch on Capitol Hill Monday, after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the House Democrats would draft their own bill, effectively derailing bipartisan legislation in the Senate.
On Monday, the GOP frustrations boiled over as details of the House bill emerged. Pelosi and her allies are looking to add many policy items to the bill that do not seem to have much relevance in the present circumstances.
For example, House Democrats want to greatly expand collective bargaining power for labor unions, implement parts of the Green New Deal, bail out the U.S. Postal Service, and enact national same-day voter registration.
"The left is all about the pursuit of power. They're doing a gun grab. They're coming after the free press. Free speech on campus is under assault. Religion is under assault," said former Virginia Rep. Dave Brat, who is now dean of the Liberty University School of Business.
"You couldn't copy the cookbook any better. The left is just pursuing power for its own sake," said Brat.
In this interview with Greg Corombos, Brat also discusses whether the economic damage inflicted by the coronavirus response could do greater damage than the virus itself. A longtime college economics professor, Brat also weighs in on whether economic relief would be more effective by focusing on helping businesses or putting money directly into the pocket of the American people.NoWhat's Next for the Energy Industry?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/sommers_1So how dire is the financial condition for U.S. energy producers and what is the Trump administration considering to help these companies?

American Petroleum Institute President Mike Sommers details what's on the table and why he doesn't want any federal interference in the energy market. He also explains what government action would do some good and why the energy industry is built for the long haul.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23765228Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:01:33 +0000Radio AmericaCoronavirus fears are driving the massive Wall Street sell-off, but turmoil in the oil market is also contributing to the instability. Even with demand falling due to the virus, Saudi Arabia is increasing production in order to drive prices down....So how dire is the financial condition for U.S. energy producers and what is the Trump administration considering to help these companies?

American Petroleum Institute President Mike Sommers details what's on the table and why he doesn't want any federal interference in the energy market. He also explains what government action would do some good and why the energy industry is built for the long haul.]]>465news,natural,taxes,trump,oil,gas,shale,saudis,tariffs,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaCoronavirus fears are driving the massive Wall Street sell-off, but turmoil in the oil market is also contributing to the instability. Even with demand falling due to the virus, Saudi Arabia is increasing production in order to drive prices down. Their goal is to drive American energy producers - particularly fracking shale producers out of business.
So how dire is the financial condition for U.S. energy producers and what is the Trump administration considering to help these companies?
American Petroleum Institute President Mike Sommers details what's on the table and why he doesn't want any federal interference in the energy market. He also explains what government action would do some good and why the energy industry is built for the long haul.No'The Markets Have Panicked'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/wesburyConcerns over coronavirus are attracting the most attention but upheaval in the oil market and record-low yields in the bond market also have investors jittery.

Wall Street hates uncertainty but a top economist says the wild fluctuations we've seen recently are a major overreaction.

"I just believe that the markets have panicked," said Brian Wesbury, chief economist at First Trust Advisors in Wheaton, Illinois. He is also a former chief economist for the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.

"Our models suggest right now that investors...are pricing in a 50-80 percent drop in corporate profits in America. I think that's a panic. That's too much.

"That doesn't mean we can't go down from here, but it does mean that once this passes, we will snap back, I think, very quickly," said Wesbury, noting that all previous outbreaks ran out of steam when the weather turned warmer.

Wesbury does think the volatility could last until May or perhaps longer and that oil prices and the bond market add to the uncertainty.

But while acknowledging that plummeting oil prices are a nightmare for debt-ridden fracking companies, Wesbury explains why he thinks this could lead to a much more stable industry in the long run.

Finally, Wesbury tells Greg Corombos whether the government ought to intervene to ease the economic pain of the coronavirus or whether the markets should sort themselves out.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23726520Tue, 10 Mar 2020 20:59:06 +0000Radio AmericaFor the past couple of weeks, Wall Street has looked like a roller coaster. And while there have been days of big gains, the Dow Jones has dropped more than 4,000 points as of Tuesday's close. Monday witnessed the worst losses since the 2008...Concerns over coronavirus are attracting the most attention but upheaval in the oil market and record-low yields in the bond market also have investors jittery.

Wall Street hates uncertainty but a top economist says the wild fluctuations we've seen recently are a major overreaction.

"I just believe that the markets have panicked," said Brian Wesbury, chief economist at First Trust Advisors in Wheaton, Illinois. He is also a former chief economist for the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.

"Our models suggest right now that investors...are pricing in a 50-80 percent drop in corporate profits in America. I think that's a panic. That's too much.

"That doesn't mean we can't go down from here, but it does mean that once this passes, we will snap back, I think, very quickly," said Wesbury, noting that all previous outbreaks ran out of steam when the weather turned warmer.

Wesbury does think the volatility could last until May or perhaps longer and that oil prices and the bond market add to the uncertainty.

But while acknowledging that plummeting oil prices are a nightmare for debt-ridden fracking companies, Wesbury explains why he thinks this could lead to a much more stable industry in the long run.

Finally, Wesbury tells Greg Corombos whether the government ought to intervene to ease the economic pain of the coronavirus or whether the markets should sort themselves out.]]>643economy,taxes,trump,oil,bonds,interest,recession,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaFor the past couple of weeks, Wall Street has looked like a roller coaster. And while there have been days of big gains, the Dow Jones has dropped more than 4,000 points as of Tuesday's close. Monday witnessed the worst losses since the 2008 financial crisis.
Concerns over coronavirus are attracting the most attention but upheaval in the oil market and record-low yields in the bond market also have investors jittery.
Wall Street hates uncertainty but a top economist says the wild fluctuations we've seen recently are a major overreaction.
"I just believe that the markets have panicked," said Brian Wesbury, chief economist at First Trust Advisors in Wheaton, Illinois. He is also a former chief economist for the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.
"Our models suggest right now that investors...are pricing in a 50-80 percent drop in corporate profits in America. I think that's a panic. That's too much.
"That doesn't mean we can't go down from here, but it does mean that once this passes, we will snap back, I think, very quickly," said Wesbury, noting that all previous outbreaks ran out of steam when the weather turned warmer.
Wesbury does think the volatility could last until May or perhaps longer and that oil prices and the bond market add to the uncertainty.
But while acknowledging that plummeting oil prices are a nightmare for debt-ridden fracking companies, Wesbury explains why he thinks this could lead to a much more stable industry in the long run.
Finally, Wesbury tells Greg Corombos whether the government ought to intervene to ease the economic pain of the coronavirus or whether the markets should sort themselves out.NoThe Economy: Another Jump in Jobs, Coronavirus Impact Loomshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/griffithOn Friday, the Labor Department released the February jobs report, showing 273,000 new hires, nearly 100,000 more than Wall Street analysts anticipated. Hiring was strong across most sectors and the unemployment rate once again dipped to a roughly 50-year low of 3.5 percent.

What is driving this continued hiring and economic growth? Supporters of President Trump or his policies point to tax cuts and regulatory reductions as spurring business owners to add personnel or expand operations, but how exactly do those policies do that?

Heritage Foundation economist Joel Griffith shares those answers with Radio America's Greg Corombos. Griffith also explains why the markets are wildly fluctuating in response to the coronavoirus threat, which policies make the most sense in response, and why the Federal Reserve was wrong to institute an unscheduled interest rate cut this week.

Listen here for the full podcast.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23576071Fri, 06 Mar 2020 22:26:33 +0000Radio AmericaThe U.S. economy keeps humming along, boosted on Friday by much stronger February job growth than expected, but with the markets in turmoil over the coronavirus, what will the economic impact be in the weeks and months to come?
On Friday, the Labor...On Friday, the Labor Department released the February jobs report, showing 273,000 new hires, nearly 100,000 more than Wall Street analysts anticipated. Hiring was strong across most sectors and the unemployment rate once again dipped to a roughly 50-year low of 3.5 percent.

What is driving this continued hiring and economic growth? Supporters of President Trump or his policies point to tax cuts and regulatory reductions as spurring business owners to add personnel or expand operations, but how exactly do those policies do that?

Heritage Foundation economist Joel Griffith shares those answers with Radio America's Greg Corombos. Griffith also explains why the markets are wildly fluctuating in response to the coronavoirus threat, which policies make the most sense in response, and why the Federal Reserve was wrong to institute an unscheduled interest rate cut this week.

Listen here for the full podcast.]]>616news,economy,jobs,taxes,fed,regulations,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaThe U.S. economy keeps humming along, boosted on Friday by much stronger February job growth than expected, but with the markets in turmoil over the coronavirus, what will the economic impact be in the weeks and months to come?
On Friday, the Labor Department released the February jobs report, showing 273,000 new hires, nearly 100,000 more than Wall Street analysts anticipated. Hiring was strong across most sectors and the unemployment rate once again dipped to a roughly 50-year low of 3.5 percent.
What is driving this continued hiring and economic growth? Supporters of President Trump or his policies point to tax cuts and regulatory reductions as spurring business owners to add personnel or expand operations, but how exactly do those policies do that?
Heritage Foundation economist Joel Griffith shares those answers with Radio America's Greg Corombos. Griffith also explains why the markets are wildly fluctuating in response to the coronavoirus threat, which policies make the most sense in response, and why the Federal Reserve was wrong to institute an unscheduled interest rate cut this week.
Listen here for the full podcast.NoInside the Israeli Electionshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/ben-onnIncomplete returns show Netanyahu's Likud Party winning the most seats. When factoring coalition partners, Netanyahu is within a seat or two in the Israeli Knesset of being able to forge a new government, but getting those final few seats could be a major challenge.

Why is Israeli so divided politically? Why did Netanyahu do better in this election despite having formal corruption charges lodged against him? What are the pros and cons of Netanyahu's chief rival, Gen. Benny Gantz of the Blue and White Party.

We discuss all of these questions with retired Israeli Brig. General Elihu Ben-Onn, who also offers his advice on how to avoid another exhausting campaign if Netanyahu cannot form a government in the days ahead.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23441437Tue, 03 Mar 2020 21:11:33 +0000Radio AmericaOn Monday, Israeli voters went to the polls for the third time in less than a year to determine it's political leadership. After two election results that failed to result in a winner, voters this time seem more favorable to keeping Prime Minister...Incomplete returns show Netanyahu's Likud Party winning the most seats. When factoring coalition partners, Netanyahu is within a seat or two in the Israeli Knesset of being able to forge a new government, but getting those final few seats could be a major challenge.

Why is Israeli so divided politically? Why did Netanyahu do better in this election despite having formal corruption charges lodged against him? What are the pros and cons of Netanyahu's chief rival, Gen. Benny Gantz of the Blue and White Party.

We discuss all of these questions with retired Israeli Brig. General Elihu Ben-Onn, who also offers his advice on how to avoid another exhausting campaign if Netanyahu cannot form a government in the days ahead.]]>665news,israel,gantz,elections,corruption,netanyahucleanfullRadio AmericaOn Monday, Israeli voters went to the polls for the third time in less than a year to determine it's political leadership. After two election results that failed to result in a winner, voters this time seem more favorable to keeping Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Incomplete returns show Netanyahu's Likud Party winning the most seats. When factoring coalition partners, Netanyahu is within a seat or two in the Israeli Knesset of being able to forge a new government, but getting those final few seats could be a major challenge.
Why is Israeli so divided politically? Why did Netanyahu do better in this election despite having formal corruption charges lodged against him? What are the pros and cons of Netanyahu's chief rival, Gen. Benny Gantz of the Blue and White Party.
We discuss all of these questions with retired Israeli Brig. General Elihu Ben-Onn, who also offers his advice on how to avoid another exhausting campaign if Netanyahu cannot form a government in the days ahead.NoWhy Non-Bernie Dems Are Rallying Around Bidenhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/haas_2So why are so many prominent Democrats coalescing around Biden after one win and three disappointing finishes? The immediate answer involves a huge number of delegates at stake tomorrow on Super Tuesday. But why Biden?

For answers, we turn to former Clinton administration official Larry Haas. We also ask whether Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar dropped out of the race on their own accord or were pushed out.

Haas and Radio America's Greg Corombos also discuss President Obama refusing to join the parade of endorsements, Joe Biden's regular verbal gaffes, and how Bernie is likely to respond to Democrats uniting against him.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23404649Mon, 02 Mar 2020 21:58:39 +0000Radio AmericaJoe Biden scored a dominating win in Saturday's South Carolina primary. Less than 48 hours later, three rivals have dropped out and the endorsements are flooding in.
So why are so many prominent Democrats coalescing around Biden after one win and...So why are so many prominent Democrats coalescing around Biden after one win and three disappointing finishes? The immediate answer involves a huge number of delegates at stake tomorrow on Super Tuesday. But why Biden?

For answers, we turn to former Clinton administration official Larry Haas. We also ask whether Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar dropped out of the race on their own accord or were pushed out.

Haas and Radio America's Greg Corombos also discuss President Obama refusing to join the parade of endorsements, Joe Biden's regular verbal gaffes, and how Bernie is likely to respond to Democrats uniting against him.]]>863news,bernie,biden,klobuchar,buttigiegcleanfullRadio AmericaJoe Biden scored a dominating win in Saturday's South Carolina primary. Less than 48 hours later, three rivals have dropped out and the endorsements are flooding in.
So why are so many prominent Democrats coalescing around Biden after one win and three disappointing finishes? The immediate answer involves a huge number of delegates at stake tomorrow on Super Tuesday. But why Biden?
For answers, we turn to former Clinton administration official Larry Haas. We also ask whether Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar dropped out of the race on their own accord or were pushed out.
Haas and Radio America's Greg Corombos also discuss President Obama refusing to join the parade of endorsements, Joe Biden's regular verbal gaffes, and how Bernie is likely to respond to Democrats uniting against him.NoCoronavirus: 'We Seem To Be In A Panic Phase'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/kleinBut is coronavirus, or COVID-19, really a menace that could kill thousands of Americans? Is the media egregiously overhyping the threat? Or is the truth somewhere in the middle?

Dr. Roger Klein has advised a wide variety of government agencies from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to the Department of Health and Human Services. Also a former medical director of molecular oncology at the Cleveland Clinic, Dr. Klein is now with the Regulatory Transparency Project's FDA and Health Working Group.

In this interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Dr. Klein walks us through how well the government has prepared for this threat, whether the media reports are responsible or hyperbolic, and he explains why China's response to COVID-19 seems so inadequate.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23300068Fri, 28 Feb 2020 21:41:46 +0000Radio AmericaCoronavirus is making its way around the world. It has government officials in the U.S. warning there might be disruptions in school calendars and work schedules due to its highly contagious nature. Markets around the world spent most of the week in...But is coronavirus, or COVID-19, really a menace that could kill thousands of Americans? Is the media egregiously overhyping the threat? Or is the truth somewhere in the middle?

Dr. Roger Klein has advised a wide variety of government agencies from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to the Department of Health and Human Services. Also a former medical director of molecular oncology at the Cleveland Clinic, Dr. Klein is now with the Regulatory Transparency Project's FDA and Health Working Group.

In this interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Dr. Klein walks us through how well the government has prepared for this threat, whether the media reports are responsible or hyperbolic, and he explains why China's response to COVID-19 seems so inadequate.]]>502news,media,government,china,coronavirus,covid-19cleanfullRadio AmericaCoronavirus is making its way around the world. It has government officials in the U.S. warning there might be disruptions in school calendars and work schedules due to its highly contagious nature. Markets around the world spent most of the week in panic mode, as investors lost trillions in value in the U.S. alone.
But is coronavirus, or COVID-19, really a menace that could kill thousands of Americans? Is the media egregiously overhyping the threat? Or is the truth somewhere in the middle?
Dr. Roger Klein has advised a wide variety of government agencies from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to the Department of Health and Human Services. Also a former medical director of molecular oncology at the Cleveland Clinic, Dr. Klein is now with the Regulatory Transparency Project's FDA and Health Working Group.
In this interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Dr. Klein walks us through how well the government has prepared for this threat, whether the media reports are responsible or hyperbolic, and he explains why China's response to COVID-19 seems so inadequate.NoWhat Should We Expect from Our Government on Coronavirus?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/gmtBut as the Trump administration prepares to deal with the issue, what can we reasonably expect our government to do in a situation like this and what is beyond its control? How aggressive should it be in pressing China for accurate data? How tough is it for the feds to keep tabs on what 50 state government are doing? And how much responsibility lies with us as citizens?

Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner addresses all of these questions with Greg Corombos and she also flatly rejects media suggestions that coronavirus is proof that we need government-run health care. In fact, she says it proves just the opposite.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23262881Thu, 27 Feb 2020 21:30:26 +0000Radio AmericaCoronavirus fears have the markets badly spooked and some Americans wondering how it may impact their daily lives in the weeks to come.
But as the Trump administration prepares to deal with the issue, what can we reasonably expect our government to...But as the Trump administration prepares to deal with the issue, what can we reasonably expect our government to do in a situation like this and what is beyond its control? How aggressive should it be in pressing China for accurate data? How tough is it for the feds to keep tabs on what 50 state government are doing? And how much responsibility lies with us as citizens?

Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner addresses all of these questions with Greg Corombos and she also flatly rejects media suggestions that coronavirus is proof that we need government-run health care. In fact, she says it proves just the opposite.]]>707news,government,states,citizens,protocols,coronaviruscleanfullRadio AmericaCoronavirus fears have the markets badly spooked and some Americans wondering how it may impact their daily lives in the weeks to come.
But as the Trump administration prepares to deal with the issue, what can we reasonably expect our government to do in a situation like this and what is beyond its control? How aggressive should it be in pressing China for accurate data? How tough is it for the feds to keep tabs on what 50 state government are doing? And how much responsibility lies with us as citizens?
Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner addresses all of these questions with Greg Corombos and she also flatly rejects media suggestions that coronavirus is proof that we need government-run health care. In fact, she says it proves just the opposite.NoPro-Life Dems Plead for Party to Changehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/dayBernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigieg have all indicated they are not interested in finding common ground with a group that makes up about 30 percent of the Democratic Party according to a recent Gallup survey. Amy Klobuchar says she welcomes them in the party but has not said where she would be willing to compromise.

Democrats for Life Executive Director Kristen Day says the party has lurched left on abortion over the past 20-30 years, shifting from wanting abortion to be safe, legal, and rare to advocating for abortions at any stage of pregnancy for any reason and wanting taxpayers to cover the bill.

Ms. Day gained notoriety for asking Buttigieg whether pro-life Democrats belonged in the party at an Iowa town hall earlier in the campaign season.

In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Day explains how she hopes to change hearts and minds among Democrats on abortion, what she thinks of Senate Democrats rejecting measures to ban most late term abortions or require care for babies who are born following an attempted abortion, and how she is approaching her vote in next week's Virginia primary.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23223550Wed, 26 Feb 2020 21:35:35 +0000Radio AmericaThe Democrats running for president disagree on quite a few things but all of them support Roe v. Wade and most seem to have little regard for pro-life members of their party.
Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigieg have all indicated...Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigieg have all indicated they are not interested in finding common ground with a group that makes up about 30 percent of the Democratic Party according to a recent Gallup survey. Amy Klobuchar says she welcomes them in the party but has not said where she would be willing to compromise.

Democrats for Life Executive Director Kristen Day says the party has lurched left on abortion over the past 20-30 years, shifting from wanting abortion to be safe, legal, and rare to advocating for abortions at any stage of pregnancy for any reason and wanting taxpayers to cover the bill.

Ms. Day gained notoriety for asking Buttigieg whether pro-life Democrats belonged in the party at an Iowa town hall earlier in the campaign season.

In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Day explains how she hopes to change hearts and minds among Democrats on abortion, what she thinks of Senate Democrats rejecting measures to ban most late term abortions or require care for babies who are born following an attempted abortion, and how she is approaching her vote in next week's Virginia primary.]]>448news,democrats,senate,abortion,sanders,2020,warren,klobuchar,buttigiegcleanfullRadio AmericaThe Democrats running for president disagree on quite a few things but all of them support Roe v. Wade and most seem to have little regard for pro-life members of their party.
Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigieg have all indicated they are not interested in finding common ground with a group that makes up about 30 percent of the Democratic Party according to a recent Gallup survey. Amy Klobuchar says she welcomes them in the party but has not said where she would be willing to compromise.
Democrats for Life Executive Director Kristen Day says the party has lurched left on abortion over the past 20-30 years, shifting from wanting abortion to be safe, legal, and rare to advocating for abortions at any stage of pregnancy for any reason and wanting taxpayers to cover the bill.
Ms. Day gained notoriety for asking Buttigieg whether pro-life Democrats belonged in the party at an Iowa town hall earlier in the campaign season.
In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Day explains how she hopes to change hearts and minds among Democrats on abortion, what she thinks of Senate Democrats rejecting measures to ban most late term abortions or require care for babies who are born following an attempted abortion, and how she is approaching her vote in next week's Virginia primary.NoK.T. McFarland Details FBI Harassment, Trump 'Revolution'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/ktSteeped in that traumatic experience, McFarland explains what it's like to be in the FBI cross hairs and how she avoided criminal charges while keeping her integrity.

McFarland also says her story is a small example of the massive battle raging between an increasingly powerful administrative state and the people through their elected leaders.

She takes us inside one of her first meetings at the National Security Council as staffers simply had no interest in shifting policy from the Obama era to pursue the Trump agenda. And McFarland responds to allegations that Trump has been soft on Russia in general and Vladimir Putin in particular.

Listen to the full podcast, as McFarland tells Greg Corombos about the scope of the problem and how the people can win.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23186579Tue, 25 Feb 2020 21:48:57 +0000Radio AmericaIn her new book, "Revolution," former Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland details how the FBI and the Mueller team hounded her, tried to trap her into a perjury charge, caused mental anguish, and put her family in financial distress all in...Steeped in that traumatic experience, McFarland explains what it's like to be in the FBI cross hairs and how she avoided criminal charges while keeping her integrity.

McFarland also says her story is a small example of the massive battle raging between an increasingly powerful administrative state and the people through their elected leaders.

She takes us inside one of her first meetings at the National Security Council as staffers simply had no interest in shifting policy from the Obama era to pursue the Trump agenda. And McFarland responds to allegations that Trump has been soft on Russia in general and Vladimir Putin in particular.

Listen to the full podcast, as McFarland tells Greg Corombos about the scope of the problem and how the people can win.]]>975news,revolution,trump,fbi,muellercleanfullRadio AmericaIn her new book, "Revolution," former Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland details how the FBI and the Mueller team hounded her, tried to trap her into a perjury charge, caused mental anguish, and put her family in financial distress all in hopes of incriminating figures in the Trump administration.
Steeped in that traumatic experience, McFarland explains what it's like to be in the FBI cross hairs and how she avoided criminal charges while keeping her integrity.
McFarland also says her story is a small example of the massive battle raging between an increasingly powerful administrative state and the people through their elected leaders.
She takes us inside one of her first meetings at the National Security Council as staffers simply had no interest in shifting policy from the Obama era to pursue the Trump agenda. And McFarland responds to allegations that Trump has been soft on Russia in general and Vladimir Putin in particular.
Listen to the full podcast, as McFarland tells Greg Corombos about the scope of the problem and how the people can win.No'Alarm Bells Are Going Off in Democratic Circles'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/haas_1Sanders narrowly won the popular vote in Iowa and New Hampshire and is a close second to Pete Buttigieg in the delegate race. But with several Democrats crowded in the non-Bernie lane, Sanders appears well positioned to pick up a lot of delegates over the next couple of weeks and beyond.

Democrats are very worried that a Sanders nomination would all but guarantee another four years for President Trump.

"Alarm bells are going off in Democratic circles. There's no question about it," said Larry Haas, who served as spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget under President Clinton and as communications director for Vice President Al Gore.

"And after last night and the view that Michael Bloomberg did not do as well as expected and that Bernie Sanders seemed to have a pretty clear field last night, other than some minor critiques of him, has only raised the alarm bells even more," said Haas.

Listen to the full podcast to hear why Haas and many other Democrats believe Sanders is incapable of defeating President Trump, what Democrats think of Bloomberg and his big spending in this campaign, where the party lines up on the question of capitalism vs. socialism, and whether he believes the non-Bernie vote can consolidate around a single alternative.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23004148Thu, 20 Feb 2020 21:16:03 +0000Radio AmericaAs the Democratic presidential race looks ahead to the Nevada caucuses on Saturday, the South Carolina primary a week after that, and Super Tuesday just three days later, the fight for the nomination is quickly picking up momentum and rank and file...Sanders narrowly won the popular vote in Iowa and New Hampshire and is a close second to Pete Buttigieg in the delegate race. But with several Democrats crowded in the non-Bernie lane, Sanders appears well positioned to pick up a lot of delegates over the next couple of weeks and beyond.

Democrats are very worried that a Sanders nomination would all but guarantee another four years for President Trump.

"Alarm bells are going off in Democratic circles. There's no question about it," said Larry Haas, who served as spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget under President Clinton and as communications director for Vice President Al Gore.

"And after last night and the view that Michael Bloomberg did not do as well as expected and that Bernie Sanders seemed to have a pretty clear field last night, other than some minor critiques of him, has only raised the alarm bells even more," said Haas.

Listen to the full podcast to hear why Haas and many other Democrats believe Sanders is incapable of defeating President Trump, what Democrats think of Bloomberg and his big spending in this campaign, where the party lines up on the question of capitalism vs. socialism, and whether he believes the non-Bernie vote can consolidate around a single alternative.]]>747news,michael,bloomberg,primaries,sanders,bernie,2020cleanfullRadio AmericaAs the Democratic presidential race looks ahead to the Nevada caucuses on Saturday, the South Carolina primary a week after that, and Super Tuesday just three days later, the fight for the nomination is quickly picking up momentum and rank and file Democrats are increasingly concerned that avowed socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders is on track to become the party's standard bearer against President Trump.
Sanders narrowly won the popular vote in Iowa and New Hampshire and is a close second to Pete Buttigieg in the delegate race. But with several Democrats crowded in the non-Bernie lane, Sanders appears well positioned to pick up a lot of delegates over the next couple of weeks and beyond.
Democrats are very worried that a Sanders nomination would all but guarantee another four years for President Trump.
"Alarm bells are going off in Democratic circles. There's no question about it," said Larry Haas, who served as spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget under President Clinton and as communications director for Vice President Al Gore.
"And after last night and the view that Michael Bloomberg did not do as well as expected and that Bernie Sanders seemed to have a pretty clear field last night, other than some minor critiques of him, has only raised the alarm bells even more," said Haas.
Listen to the full podcast to hear why Haas and many other Democrats believe Sanders is incapable of defeating President Trump, what Democrats think of Bloomberg and his big spending in this campaign, where the party lines up on the question of capitalism vs. socialism, and whether he believes the non-Bernie vote can consolidate around a single alternative.NoAbortion Fights Head to Senate, Supreme Courthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/stenbergBoth bill will likely fail to attract 60 votes, which means they cannot proceed to a final vote. Even if they did, the legislation would never see the light of day in the House of Representatives.

What does it say about our culture and our politics that these bills cannot pass? Or that the media barely pay attention to a South Bend, Indiana, abortion provider who kept more than 2,000 fetal remains at his home?

We discuss these questions and much more with former Nebraska Attorney General Don Stenberg, who led the fight for a partial birth abortion ban all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Stenberg also tells Greg Corombos about the critical case about to come before the Supreme Court, what he thinks of pro-life legislation like the heartbeat bills, and how he interprets presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg reacting to the fetal remains story simply by saying he hopes the news won't be politicized.

Finally, they discuss Stenberg's new book, "Eavesdropping on Lucifer."]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22783145Wed, 19 Feb 2020 21:50:08 +0000Radio AmericaIn the coming days, the U.S. Senate will hold votes on two pieces of pro-life legislation. One would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The other would require doctors or abortion practitioners to provide medical care to any baby surviving an...Both bill will likely fail to attract 60 votes, which means they cannot proceed to a final vote. Even if they did, the legislation would never see the light of day in the House of Representatives.

What does it say about our culture and our politics that these bills cannot pass? Or that the media barely pay attention to a South Bend, Indiana, abortion provider who kept more than 2,000 fetal remains at his home?

We discuss these questions and much more with former Nebraska Attorney General Don Stenberg, who led the fight for a partial birth abortion ban all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Stenberg also tells Greg Corombos about the critical case about to come before the Supreme Court, what he thinks of pro-life legislation like the heartbeat bills, and how he interprets presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg reacting to the fetal remains story simply by saying he hopes the news won't be politicized.

Finally, they discuss Stenberg's new book, "Eavesdropping on Lucifer."]]>1049news,pain,senate,abortion,buttigieg,stenberg.cleanfullRadio AmericaIn the coming days, the U.S. Senate will hold votes on two pieces of pro-life legislation. One would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The other would require doctors or abortion practitioners to provide medical care to any baby surviving an attempted abortion.
Both bill will likely fail to attract 60 votes, which means they cannot proceed to a final vote. Even if they did, the legislation would never see the light of day in the House of Representatives.
What does it say about our culture and our politics that these bills cannot pass? Or that the media barely pay attention to a South Bend, Indiana, abortion provider who kept more than 2,000 fetal remains at his home?
We discuss these questions and much more with former Nebraska Attorney General Don Stenberg, who led the fight for a partial birth abortion ban all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Stenberg also tells Greg Corombos about the critical case about to come before the Supreme Court, what he thinks of pro-life legislation like the heartbeat bills, and how he interprets presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg reacting to the fetal remains story simply by saying he hopes the news won't be politicized.
Finally, they discuss Stenberg's new book, "Eavesdropping on Lucifer."NoGun Rights Group Takes on Bloomberghttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hammond_5Democrats won majorities in both chambers of the Virginia legislature in November. In the coming weeks, legislation will likely be passed to accomplish much of the gun control agenda, including universal background checks, an "assault weapons" ban, limiting the number of rounds in a magazine, limiting firearm purchases to one per month, and "red flag" laws that allow law enforcement to remove weapons from citizens if they are deemed a threat to themselves or others.

Gun Owners of America Legislative Counsel Mike Hammond says Bloomberg and his gun control allies are about to get everything they want.,

"The entire gun control agenda, as advocated by the most ardent New York gun control activists has effectively been enacted n Virginia - as soon as the two houses work out minor differences. Virginia has now become New York or California," said Hammond.

Hammond has no doubt Bloomberg wants to enact the same type of laws on a national scale. It's a risk he says the United States cannot afford.

"Gun Owners of America understands that this is pretty much Armageddon for us...If he's able to use his $55 billion in order to buy our Constitution, then I think it's game over for us," said Hammond.

With the Democratic presidential primary coming up March 3, Hammond says Gun Owners of America plans to actively campaign against Bloomberg.

In this podcast, Hammond tells Greg Corombos why he sees a Bloomberg presidency as an existential threat, how a pro-gun group will try to convince Democrats to vote against Bloomberg, and whether the second amendment sanctuary movement in Virginia is an effective firewall against the gun control agenda.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22783143Fri, 14 Feb 2020 22:02:22 +0000Radio AmericaFormer New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg spent a lot of money in recent years to help elect a Democratic majority in the Virginia legislature with the expectation those new lawmakers would enact gun control legislation. Now that dream is coming...Democrats won majorities in both chambers of the Virginia legislature in November. In the coming weeks, legislation will likely be passed to accomplish much of the gun control agenda, including universal background checks, an "assault weapons" ban, limiting the number of rounds in a magazine, limiting firearm purchases to one per month, and "red flag" laws that allow law enforcement to remove weapons from citizens if they are deemed a threat to themselves or others.

Gun Owners of America Legislative Counsel Mike Hammond says Bloomberg and his gun control allies are about to get everything they want.,

"The entire gun control agenda, as advocated by the most ardent New York gun control activists has effectively been enacted n Virginia - as soon as the two houses work out minor differences. Virginia has now become New York or California," said Hammond.

Hammond has no doubt Bloomberg wants to enact the same type of laws on a national scale. It's a risk he says the United States cannot afford.

"Gun Owners of America understands that this is pretty much Armageddon for us...If he's able to use his $55 billion in order to buy our Constitution, then I think it's game over for us," said Hammond.

With the Democratic presidential primary coming up March 3, Hammond says Gun Owners of America plans to actively campaign against Bloomberg.

In this podcast, Hammond tells Greg Corombos why he sees a Bloomberg presidency as an existential threat, how a pro-gun group will try to convince Democrats to vote against Bloomberg, and whether the second amendment sanctuary movement in Virginia is an effective firewall against the gun control agenda.]]>621news,guns,virginia,bloomberg,2020cleanfullRadio AmericaFormer New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg spent a lot of money in recent years to help elect a Democratic majority in the Virginia legislature with the expectation those new lawmakers would enact gun control legislation. Now that dream is coming true, and a leading gun rights organization is now looking to turn the Virginia primary into an electoral nightmare for Bloomberg's presidential ambitions.
Democrats won majorities in both chambers of the Virginia legislature in November. In the coming weeks, legislation will likely be passed to accomplish much of the gun control agenda, including universal background checks, an "assault weapons" ban, limiting the number of rounds in a magazine, limiting firearm purchases to one per month, and "red flag" laws that allow law enforcement to remove weapons from citizens if they are deemed a threat to themselves or others.
Gun Owners of America Legislative Counsel Mike Hammond says Bloomberg and his gun control allies are about to get everything they want.,
"The entire gun control agenda, as advocated by the most ardent New York gun control activists has effectively been enacted n Virginia - as soon as the two houses work out minor differences. Virginia has now become New York or California," said Hammond.
Hammond has no doubt Bloomberg wants to enact the same type of laws on a national scale. It's a risk he says the United States cannot afford.
"Gun Owners of America understands that this is pretty much Armageddon for us...If he's able to use his $55 billion in order to buy our Constitution, then I think it's game over for us," said Hammond.
With the Democratic presidential primary coming up March 3, Hammond says Gun Owners of America plans to actively campaign against Bloomberg.
In this podcast, Hammond tells Greg Corombos why he sees a Bloomberg presidency as an existential threat, how a pro-gun group will try to convince Democrats to vote against Bloomberg, and whether the second amendment sanctuary movement in Virginia is an effective firewall against the gun control agenda.NoThe Roger Stone Sentencing Fiascohttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_16Last year, Stone was convicted on charges of obstruction, making false statements, and witness tampering as part of the Mueller investigation into alleged Russian collusion with the Trump campaign during the 2016 campaign.

Earlier this week, prosecutors recommended Stone be sentenced seven to nine years in prison. President Trump blasted the recommendation on Twitter as too harsh and as a "miscarriage of justice." Tuesday, the Justice Department announced it was withdrawing that sentencing recommendation and urging a shorter prison term of 37-46 months. DOJ sources also contend prosecutors misled department officials on the recommendation. Trump subsequently thanked Attorney General Bill Barr for taking action.

Critics of Trump and Barr contend this is evidence of the erosion of the rule of law and that Barr is simply doing Trump's bidding. All four prosecutors on the case subsequently resigned in protest.

So why was the original recommendation seven to nine years? Was there a sound legal basis for it or was it excessive? Was Trump way out of line to intervene in the case or is that his right as head of the executive branch? And why did the prosecutors resign?

We discuss all of this and more with former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew C. McCarthy, who is now a contributing editor at National Review Online and a Fox News Channel contributor.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22706991Wed, 12 Feb 2020 22:33:30 +0000Radio AmericaPresident Trump finds himself in the center of more controversy this week, this time for weighing in on the sentencing of former political confidant Roger Stone.
Last year, Stone was convicted on charges of obstruction, making false statements, and...Last year, Stone was convicted on charges of obstruction, making false statements, and witness tampering as part of the Mueller investigation into alleged Russian collusion with the Trump campaign during the 2016 campaign.

Earlier this week, prosecutors recommended Stone be sentenced seven to nine years in prison. President Trump blasted the recommendation on Twitter as too harsh and as a "miscarriage of justice." Tuesday, the Justice Department announced it was withdrawing that sentencing recommendation and urging a shorter prison term of 37-46 months. DOJ sources also contend prosecutors misled department officials on the recommendation. Trump subsequently thanked Attorney General Bill Barr for taking action.

Critics of Trump and Barr contend this is evidence of the erosion of the rule of law and that Barr is simply doing Trump's bidding. All four prosecutors on the case subsequently resigned in protest.

So why was the original recommendation seven to nine years? Was there a sound legal basis for it or was it excessive? Was Trump way out of line to intervene in the case or is that his right as head of the executive branch? And why did the prosecutors resign?

We discuss all of this and more with former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew C. McCarthy, who is now a contributing editor at National Review Online and a Fox News Channel contributor.]]>831news,justice,trump,stone,sentencingcleanfullRadio AmericaPresident Trump finds himself in the center of more controversy this week, this time for weighing in on the sentencing of former political confidant Roger Stone.
Last year, Stone was convicted on charges of obstruction, making false statements, and witness tampering as part of the Mueller investigation into alleged Russian collusion with the Trump campaign during the 2016 campaign.
Earlier this week, prosecutors recommended Stone be sentenced seven to nine years in prison. President Trump blasted the recommendation on Twitter as too harsh and as a "miscarriage of justice." Tuesday, the Justice Department announced it was withdrawing that sentencing recommendation and urging a shorter prison term of 37-46 months. DOJ sources also contend prosecutors misled department officials on the recommendation. Trump subsequently thanked Attorney General Bill Barr for taking action.
Critics of Trump and Barr contend this is evidence of the erosion of the rule of law and that Barr is simply doing Trump's bidding. All four prosecutors on the case subsequently resigned in protest.
So why was the original recommendation seven to nine years? Was there a sound legal basis for it or was it excessive? Was Trump way out of line to intervene in the case or is that his right as head of the executive branch? And why did the prosecutors resign?
We discuss all of this and more with former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew C. McCarthy, who is now a contributing editor at National Review Online and a Fox News Channel contributor.NoBernie's Budget-Busting Planshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/sepp_11Former Clinton administration Treasury Sec. Larry Summers says the whole agenda would cost $60 trillion over ten years - more than doubling all current government expenditures. Sanders has plans to raise $20 trillion in new taxes but has not explained how to cover the other $40 trillion.

But even if Sanders only gets a fraction of what he wants, who would pay the bill? Sanders says corporations, Wall Street, and "the rich" would pick up the tab. But how will he have to define "rich" to get to $20 trillion?

National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp joins Greg Corombos to discuss what paying for the Sanders agenda would really look like, why higher taxes eventually stop producing more revenue, and what would happen to Social Security and Medicare if we pile on more entitlement programs.

Sepp also addresses claims that debt doesn't really matter and has less than sterling reviews for President Trump's latest budget proposal.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22669732Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:24:02 +0000Radio AmericaBernie Sanders wants government-run health care for all. He also wants a Green New Deal, college debt forgiveness, universal child care, universal preschool and more.
Former Clinton administration Treasury Sec. Larry Summers says the whole agenda...Former Clinton administration Treasury Sec. Larry Summers says the whole agenda would cost $60 trillion over ten years - more than doubling all current government expenditures. Sanders has plans to raise $20 trillion in new taxes but has not explained how to cover the other $40 trillion.

But even if Sanders only gets a fraction of what he wants, who would pay the bill? Sanders says corporations, Wall Street, and "the rich" would pick up the tab. But how will he have to define "rich" to get to $20 trillion?

National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp joins Greg Corombos to discuss what paying for the Sanders agenda would really look like, why higher taxes eventually stop producing more revenue, and what would happen to Social Security and Medicare if we pile on more entitlement programs.

Sepp also addresses claims that debt doesn't really matter and has less than sterling reviews for President Trump's latest budget proposal.]]>861news,taxes,trump,spending,bernie,entitlementscleanfullRadio AmericaBernie Sanders wants government-run health care for all. He also wants a Green New Deal, college debt forgiveness, universal child care, universal preschool and more.
Former Clinton administration Treasury Sec. Larry Summers says the whole agenda would cost $60 trillion over ten years - more than doubling all current government expenditures. Sanders has plans to raise $20 trillion in new taxes but has not explained how to cover the other $40 trillion.
But even if Sanders only gets a fraction of what he wants, who would pay the bill? Sanders says corporations, Wall Street, and "the rich" would pick up the tab. But how will he have to define "rich" to get to $20 trillion?
National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp joins Greg Corombos to discuss what paying for the Sanders agenda would really look like, why higher taxes eventually stop producing more revenue, and what would happen to Social Security and Medicare if we pile on more entitlement programs.
Sepp also addresses claims that debt doesn't really matter and has less than sterling reviews for President Trump's latest budget proposal.No'The Severity Is Much Greater Than China Is Reporting'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/chang_7"The severity is much greater than China is officially reporting," said Chang. "There are stories that Wuhan, the epicenter of the virus, is cremating hundreds of bodies a day. That doesn't fit very easily with a death toll of a thousand."

But why what does China have to gain by lying about the severity? Chang says it's all about control.

"Xi Xinping, the Chinese ruler, is much more interested in controlling the narrative than he is in ending the epidemic," said Chang.

Chang discusses the impact that the mass quarantines are having on the Chinese economy and what the U.S. posture should be as this plays out.

In addition, Chang reacts to the news that the U.S. is indicting four Chinese military officials for the massive 2017 Equifax hack that compromised the information of more than 145 million people.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22666312Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:08:50 +0000Radio AmericaThe Chinese government is reporting more than 1,000 deaths related to coronavirus but China expert Gordon Chang says it's clear from how officials are reacting with mass quarantines and other tactics that the problem is much worse than reported...."The severity is much greater than China is officially reporting," said Chang. "There are stories that Wuhan, the epicenter of the virus, is cremating hundreds of bodies a day. That doesn't fit very easily with a death toll of a thousand."

But why what does China have to gain by lying about the severity? Chang says it's all about control.

"Xi Xinping, the Chinese ruler, is much more interested in controlling the narrative than he is in ending the epidemic," said Chang.

Chang discusses the impact that the mass quarantines are having on the Chinese economy and what the U.S. posture should be as this plays out.

In addition, Chang reacts to the news that the U.S. is indicting four Chinese military officials for the massive 2017 Equifax hack that compromised the information of more than 145 million people.]]>616health,china,hacking,trade,equifax,xi,cyberwarfare,coronavirus,xinpingcleanfullRadio AmericaThe Chinese government is reporting more than 1,000 deaths related to coronavirus but China expert Gordon Chang says it's clear from how officials are reacting with mass quarantines and other tactics that the problem is much worse than reported.
"The severity is much greater than China is officially reporting," said Chang. "There are stories that Wuhan, the epicenter of the virus, is cremating hundreds of bodies a day. That doesn't fit very easily with a death toll of a thousand."
But why what does China have to gain by lying about the severity? Chang says it's all about control.
"Xi Xinping, the Chinese ruler, is much more interested in controlling the narrative than he is in ending the epidemic," said Chang.
Chang discusses the impact that the mass quarantines are having on the Chinese economy and what the U.S. posture should be as this plays out.
In addition, Chang reacts to the news that the U.S. is indicting four Chinese military officials for the massive 2017 Equifax hack that compromised the information of more than 145 million people.NoDems Take Aim at 'Right to Work' Lawshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mix_2This week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, also known as the PRO Act. Supporters claim it paves the way for employees to organize if they wish and protects them from retribution from employers. Critics contend it forces workers to pay union dues even if they don't want anything to do with a labor union.

Opponents also warn that the legislation would force independent contractors to be classified as employees, a designation that has led to major upheaval in the gig economy in California after similar legislation was enacted last year.

In addition to the debate in Congress, which will likely go nowhere in the U.S. Senate, the new Democratic majorities in Virginia are also taking aim at right to work laws with competing bills in the House of Delegates and the State Senate.

Further complicating the Democrats' efforts are statistics from Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam. According to his projections, repealing right to work laws in Virginia would cost the commonwealth $11 billion and 37,000 jobs.

With both sides of the debate claiming to be on the side of workers, what does the evidence show? What protections already exist for workers wishing to organize and what would the bills in Washington and in Virginia actually accomplish?

We get answers to those questions with National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22528518Fri, 07 Feb 2020 21:27:38 +0000Radio AmericaDemocrats in Congress and in Virginia are pursuing legislation they say protects the right of workers to organize but critics say it's nothing more than an effort to compel union membership for workers whether they want to belong or not.
This week,...This week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, also known as the PRO Act. Supporters claim it paves the way for employees to organize if they wish and protects them from retribution from employers. Critics contend it forces workers to pay union dues even if they don't want anything to do with a labor union.

Opponents also warn that the legislation would force independent contractors to be classified as employees, a designation that has led to major upheaval in the gig economy in California after similar legislation was enacted last year.

In addition to the debate in Congress, which will likely go nowhere in the U.S. Senate, the new Democratic majorities in Virginia are also taking aim at right to work laws with competing bills in the House of Delegates and the State Senate.

Further complicating the Democrats' efforts are statistics from Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam. According to his projections, repealing right to work laws in Virginia would cost the commonwealth $11 billion and 37,000 jobs.

With both sides of the debate claiming to be on the side of workers, what does the evidence show? What protections already exist for workers wishing to organize and what would the bills in Washington and in Virginia actually accomplish?

We get answers to those questions with National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.]]>792news,work,virginia,congress,labor,unionscleanfullRadio AmericaDemocrats in Congress and in Virginia are pursuing legislation they say protects the right of workers to organize but critics say it's nothing more than an effort to compel union membership for workers whether they want to belong or not.
This week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, also known as the PRO Act. Supporters claim it paves the way for employees to organize if they wish and protects them from retribution from employers. Critics contend it forces workers to pay union dues even if they don't want anything to do with a labor union.
Opponents also warn that the legislation would force independent contractors to be classified as employees, a designation that has led to major upheaval in the gig economy in California after similar legislation was enacted last year.
In addition to the debate in Congress, which will likely go nowhere in the U.S. Senate, the new Democratic majorities in Virginia are also taking aim at right to work laws with competing bills in the House of Delegates and the State Senate.
Further complicating the Democrats' efforts are statistics from Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam. According to his projections, repealing right to work laws in Virginia would cost the commonwealth $11 billion and 37,000 jobs.
With both sides of the debate claiming to be on the side of workers, what does the evidence show? What protections already exist for workers wishing to organize and what would the bills in Washington and in Virginia actually accomplish?
We get answers to those questions with National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.NoMcCarthy Talks Acquittal, Romney & Ongoing Investigationshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_15Critics of the president contend the Senate did not allow for a fair trial with witnesses and documents. Supporters of the president say Democrats used the Constitution to abuse it. So how did the Constitution hold up to the actions of the House and Senate?

Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy explains where he thinks the process was abused and where it functioned as designed. He also offers a passionate rebuttal to the arguments for conviction offered by Utah GOP Sen. Mitt Romney and tells us why no Democrats voted to acquit on the obstruction charge.

Finally, McCarthy tells Radio America's Greg Corombos why this verdict does not end investigations into the Trump administration and how many different ways Democrats plan to target him in the months leading up to Election Day.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22492336Thu, 06 Feb 2020 21:52:51 +0000Radio AmericaThe U.S. Senate acquitted President Trump of allegations of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress Wednesday. But what is the aftermath?
Critics of the president contend the Senate did not allow for a fair trial with witnesses and documents....Critics of the president contend the Senate did not allow for a fair trial with witnesses and documents. Supporters of the president say Democrats used the Constitution to abuse it. So how did the Constitution hold up to the actions of the House and Senate?

Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy explains where he thinks the process was abused and where it functioned as designed. He also offers a passionate rebuttal to the arguments for conviction offered by Utah GOP Sen. Mitt Romney and tells us why no Democrats voted to acquit on the obstruction charge.

Finally, McCarthy tells Radio America's Greg Corombos why this verdict does not end investigations into the Trump administration and how many different ways Democrats plan to target him in the months leading up to Election Day.]]>770news,trump,senate,acquittal,impeachment,ukrainecleanfullRadio AmericaThe U.S. Senate acquitted President Trump of allegations of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress Wednesday. But what is the aftermath?
Critics of the president contend the Senate did not allow for a fair trial with witnesses and documents. Supporters of the president say Democrats used the Constitution to abuse it. So how did the Constitution hold up to the actions of the House and Senate?
Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy explains where he thinks the process was abused and where it functioned as designed. He also offers a passionate rebuttal to the arguments for conviction offered by Utah GOP Sen. Mitt Romney and tells us why no Democrats voted to acquit on the obstruction charge.
Finally, McCarthy tells Radio America's Greg Corombos why this verdict does not end investigations into the Trump administration and how many different ways Democrats plan to target him in the months leading up to Election Day.NoStrong Economy Spreading Prosperityhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/murdock_4Near the beginning of his speech, Trump noted the unemployment rate is the lowest in 50 years. He also stated the unemployment rates for blacks, Hispanics, Asians, veterans and the disabled are at all-time lows. Unemployment for women stands at the lowest rate since the early 1950's.

So how much credit does President Trump deserve? National Review Online Contributing Editor Deroy Murdock says Trump's tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks are a big reason that employers are growing and expanding. And he also explains why Democrats refused to applaud good jobless data.

In addition, Trump says his tax cuts are spurring wealthy Americans to invest in previously neglected communities through "opportunity zones" and that is giving residents of those areas the chance to find good jobs and bring stability to their neighborhoods.

Finally, Trump made a strong push for school choice, highlighting the story of Janiyah Davis, who is trapped in a bad public school in Philadelphia. Trump awarded Davis an opportunity scholarship during his speech and challenged Congress to pass legislation that would give one million other kids the same access to better schools.

But what is the real story on opportunity zones? How do they work and what impact do they really have? And how big of an issue is school choice to parents who can't afford to move their kids out of failing schools?

In this podcast, Murdock discusses all these questions and more with Radio America's Greg Corombos.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22456383Thu, 06 Feb 2020 02:40:48 +0000Radio AmericaTuesday night President Trump touted historically low unemployment rates in a litany of categories. He also says his tax cuts are creating economic opportunities in struggling communities and that he wants to give parents the option of moving their...Near the beginning of his speech, Trump noted the unemployment rate is the lowest in 50 years. He also stated the unemployment rates for blacks, Hispanics, Asians, veterans and the disabled are at all-time lows. Unemployment for women stands at the lowest rate since the early 1950's.

So how much credit does President Trump deserve? National Review Online Contributing Editor Deroy Murdock says Trump's tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks are a big reason that employers are growing and expanding. And he also explains why Democrats refused to applaud good jobless data.

In addition, Trump says his tax cuts are spurring wealthy Americans to invest in previously neglected communities through "opportunity zones" and that is giving residents of those areas the chance to find good jobs and bring stability to their neighborhoods.

Finally, Trump made a strong push for school choice, highlighting the story of Janiyah Davis, who is trapped in a bad public school in Philadelphia. Trump awarded Davis an opportunity scholarship during his speech and challenged Congress to pass legislation that would give one million other kids the same access to better schools.

But what is the real story on opportunity zones? How do they work and what impact do they really have? And how big of an issue is school choice to parents who can't afford to move their kids out of failing schools?

In this podcast, Murdock discusses all these questions and more with Radio America's Greg Corombos.]]>931news,school,economy,jobs,choice,trump,opportunity,sotu,zonescleanfullRadio AmericaTuesday night President Trump touted historically low unemployment rates in a litany of categories. He also says his tax cuts are creating economic opportunities in struggling communities and that he wants to give parents the option of moving their kids out of failing schools.
Near the beginning of his speech, Trump noted the unemployment rate is the lowest in 50 years. He also stated the unemployment rates for blacks, Hispanics, Asians, veterans and the disabled are at all-time lows. Unemployment for women stands at the lowest rate since the early 1950's.
So how much credit does President Trump deserve? National Review Online Contributing Editor Deroy Murdock says Trump's tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks are a big reason that employers are growing and expanding. And he also explains why Democrats refused to applaud good jobless data.
In addition, Trump says his tax cuts are spurring wealthy Americans to invest in previously neglected communities through "opportunity zones" and that is giving residents of those areas the chance to find good jobs and bring stability to their neighborhoods.
Finally, Trump made a strong push for school choice, highlighting the story of Janiyah Davis, who is trapped in a bad public school in Philadelphia. Trump awarded Davis an opportunity scholarship during his speech and challenged Congress to pass legislation that would give one million other kids the same access to better schools.
But what is the real story on opportunity zones? How do they work and what impact do they really have? And how big of an issue is school choice to parents who can't afford to move their kids out of failing schools?
In this podcast, Murdock discusses all these questions and more with Radio America's Greg Corombos.NoComing Home: Why Conservatives Believe Trump Can Surge Among Black Votershttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/eberleBut authors Bruce Eberle and Vernon Robinson believe Trump has the chance to make surprisingly large inroads with black voters, who have backed Republican nominees less than 10 percent of the time in recent election cycles. Their new book is entitled "Coming Home: How Black Americans Will Re-Elect Trump."

So why is Trump in position to make significant gains after intense criticism of his handling of the deadly demonstrations in Charlottesville and other accusations of racism? What about the Trump record in his first term might cause black voters to take a closer look? Why might polls of black voters prior to the election distort reality? And how might the Democrats try to prevent Trump from making any significant gains?

Bruce Eberle addresses all of these questions in his conversation with Greg Corombos.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22381786Mon, 03 Feb 2020 22:01:58 +0000Radio AmericaThe 2020 presidential campaign comes at a time when Americans appear more politically divided than ever. Many analysts contend very few minds are capable of changing. Either you like President Trump or fear what one of the Democrats would do in...But authors Bruce Eberle and Vernon Robinson believe Trump has the chance to make surprisingly large inroads with black voters, who have backed Republican nominees less than 10 percent of the time in recent election cycles. Their new book is entitled "Coming Home: How Black Americans Will Re-Elect Trump."

So why is Trump in position to make significant gains after intense criticism of his handling of the deadly demonstrations in Charlottesville and other accusations of racism? What about the Trump record in his first term might cause black voters to take a closer look? Why might polls of black voters prior to the election distort reality? And how might the Democrats try to prevent Trump from making any significant gains?

Bruce Eberle addresses all of these questions in his conversation with Greg Corombos.]]>639news,black,trump,2020,voterscleanfullRadio AmericaThe 2020 presidential campaign comes at a time when Americans appear more politically divided than ever. Many analysts contend very few minds are capable of changing. Either you like President Trump or fear what one of the Democrats would do in office or you want virtually anyone but Trump and you'll side with whoever the Democrats nominate.
But authors Bruce Eberle and Vernon Robinson believe Trump has the chance to make surprisingly large inroads with black voters, who have backed Republican nominees less than 10 percent of the time in recent election cycles. Their new book is entitled "Coming Home: How Black Americans Will Re-Elect Trump."
So why is Trump in position to make significant gains after intense criticism of his handling of the deadly demonstrations in Charlottesville and other accusations of racism? What about the Trump record in his first term might cause black voters to take a closer look? Why might polls of black voters prior to the election distort reality? And how might the Democrats try to prevent Trump from making any significant gains?
Bruce Eberle addresses all of these questions in his conversation with Greg Corombos.NoThe State of the Mediahttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/guilletteBias has been an issue for decades but now objectivity seems to be an endangered species. How did we get this way?

In this interview with Greg Corombos, Accuracy in Media Pres. Adam Guillette describes the drastic change in media over the past several years and how media fragmentation plays a major role in that.

Guillette also discusses what media accuracy ought to look like and whether it is fair for President Trump to call some journalists purveyors of "fake news." Finally, Guillette discusses how to fight back against false stories and which journalists he thinks get it right most of the time.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22281275Fri, 31 Jan 2020 21:40:45 +0000Radio AmericaGood luck finding a cable news outlet, newspaper, or online news site that doesn't have a fairly obvious bias on issues ranging from impeachment to the strike that killed Gen. Soleimani to the state of our economy.
Bias has been an issue for decades...Bias has been an issue for decades but now objectivity seems to be an endangered species. How did we get this way?

In this interview with Greg Corombos, Accuracy in Media Pres. Adam Guillette describes the drastic change in media over the past several years and how media fragmentation plays a major role in that.

Guillette also discusses what media accuracy ought to look like and whether it is fair for President Trump to call some journalists purveyors of "fake news." Finally, Guillette discusses how to fight back against false stories and which journalists he thinks get it right most of the time.]]>522news,media,trump,journalism,impeachment,biascleanfullRadio AmericaGood luck finding a cable news outlet, newspaper, or online news site that doesn't have a fairly obvious bias on issues ranging from impeachment to the strike that killed Gen. Soleimani to the state of our economy.
Bias has been an issue for decades but now objectivity seems to be an endangered species. How did we get this way?
In this interview with Greg Corombos, Accuracy in Media Pres. Adam Guillette describes the drastic change in media over the past several years and how media fragmentation plays a major role in that.
Guillette also discusses what media accuracy ought to look like and whether it is fair for President Trump to call some journalists purveyors of "fake news." Finally, Guillette discusses how to fight back against false stories and which journalists he thinks get it right most of the time.NoMcCarthy Dissects Senate Impeachment Questions, Bolton Revelationshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_14In this podcast, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy tackles those questions and also dives into the controversy over former National Security Adviser John Bolton allegedly confirming Trump demanded Ukraine launch investigations in exchange for military aid from the U.S. And McCarthy offers a way to give both sides what they want with respect to Bolton without extending the trial any longer than necessary]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22210472Wed, 29 Jan 2020 22:18:15 +0000Radio AmericaOn Wednesday, the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump shifted to a new phase, with senators asking questions of the lawyers on both sides of the case. But did we get some insightful and pertinent questions or was it mostly political...In this podcast, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy tackles those questions and also dives into the controversy over former National Security Adviser John Bolton allegedly confirming Trump demanded Ukraine launch investigations in exchange for military aid from the U.S. And McCarthy offers a way to give both sides what they want with respect to Bolton without extending the trial any longer than necessary]]>1136news,trump,questions,impeachment,ukraine,boltoncleanfullRadio AmericaOn Wednesday, the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump shifted to a new phase, with senators asking questions of the lawyers on both sides of the case. But did we get some insightful and pertinent questions or was it mostly political grandstanding? And did we learn anything new?
In this podcast, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy tackles those questions and also dives into the controversy over former National Security Adviser John Bolton allegedly confirming Trump demanded Ukraine launch investigations in exchange for military aid from the U.S. And McCarthy offers a way to give both sides what they want with respect to Bolton without extending the trial any longer than necessaryNoFormer Commerce Secretary Barbara Franklin Talks Trade Dealshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/franklin_1Last week, the Senate followed the House of Representatives in approving the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement, also known as USMCA, which President Trump signed on Wednesday. In addition, President Trump also signed phase one of a new trade framework with China.

But how good is USMCA? What are the biggest changes compared to the North American Free Trade Agreement? Why is this a big win for the auto industry? And what impact will the new environmental rules have?

Former Commerce Secretary Barbara Franklin played a key role in negotiating and advancing the North American Free Trade agreement in the 1990's. She explains why it was right to renegotiate and why she thinks the USMCA is an improvement in most cases.

Franklin also sizes up phase one of the China trade deal and what U.S. priorities ought to be in the remainder of the talks.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22171474Wed, 29 Jan 2020 20:08:54 +0000Radio AmericaIt's been a busy stretch for highly touted trade deals. The Trump administration already completed new trade agreements with Japan and South Korea.
Last week, the Senate followed the House of Representatives in approving the U.S.-Mexico-Canada...Last week, the Senate followed the House of Representatives in approving the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement, also known as USMCA, which President Trump signed on Wednesday. In addition, President Trump also signed phase one of a new trade framework with China.

But how good is USMCA? What are the biggest changes compared to the North American Free Trade Agreement? Why is this a big win for the auto industry? And what impact will the new environmental rules have?

Former Commerce Secretary Barbara Franklin played a key role in negotiating and advancing the North American Free Trade agreement in the 1990's. She explains why it was right to renegotiate and why she thinks the USMCA is an improvement in most cases.

Franklin also sizes up phase one of the China trade deal and what U.S. priorities ought to be in the remainder of the talks.]]>989news,mexico,canada,trump,china,nafta,usmcacleanfullRadio AmericaIt's been a busy stretch for highly touted trade deals. The Trump administration already completed new trade agreements with Japan and South Korea.
Last week, the Senate followed the House of Representatives in approving the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement, also known as USMCA, which President Trump signed on Wednesday. In addition, President Trump also signed phase one of a new trade framework with China.
But how good is USMCA? What are the biggest changes compared to the North American Free Trade Agreement? Why is this a big win for the auto industry? And what impact will the new environmental rules have?
Former Commerce Secretary Barbara Franklin played a key role in negotiating and advancing the North American Free Trade agreement in the 1990's. She explains why it was right to renegotiate and why she thinks the USMCA is an improvement in most cases.
Franklin also sizes up phase one of the China trade deal and what U.S. priorities ought to be in the remainder of the talks.NoToensing: Bolton's Revelation Irrelevanthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/toensing_4But while some in the nation's capital say this amounts to a smoking gun of a quid pro quo, former Justice Department official and former federal prosecutor Victoria Toensing says the revelations doesn't matter at all.

"It matters NOT AT ALL what @realDonaldTrump told John Bolton. We do not prosecute people for thoughts or words. Only for conduct. Ukraine got aid but did not announce investigation. Nothing wrong there. #maga2020," tweeted Toensing.

In this podcast, Toensing explains why she believes threatening to withhold foreign aid is standard practice in dealing with foreign nations and she does not believe President Trump did anything out of the ordinary.

Toensing also shares why she believes this saga had nothing to do with 2020 and everything to do with 2016.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22135126Mon, 27 Jan 2020 23:12:01 +0000Radio AmericaWashington is abuzz with the news that former National Security Adviser John Bolton plans to state in his upcoming book that President Trump ordered him not to release military aid to Ukraine until it agreed to conduct the investigations he requested...But while some in the nation's capital say this amounts to a smoking gun of a quid pro quo, former Justice Department official and former federal prosecutor Victoria Toensing says the revelations doesn't matter at all.

"It matters NOT AT ALL what @realDonaldTrump told John Bolton. We do not prosecute people for thoughts or words. Only for conduct. Ukraine got aid but did not announce investigation. Nothing wrong there. #maga2020," tweeted Toensing.

In this podcast, Toensing explains why she believes threatening to withhold foreign aid is standard practice in dealing with foreign nations and she does not believe President Trump did anything out of the ordinary.

Toensing also shares why she believes this saga had nothing to do with 2020 and everything to do with 2016.]]>450news,john,trump,president,2020,impeachment,ukraine,2016,boltoncleanfullRadio AmericaWashington is abuzz with the news that former National Security Adviser John Bolton plans to state in his upcoming book that President Trump ordered him not to release military aid to Ukraine until it agreed to conduct the investigations he requested into the 2016 campaign.
But while some in the nation's capital say this amounts to a smoking gun of a quid pro quo, former Justice Department official and former federal prosecutor Victoria Toensing says the revelations doesn't matter at all.
"It matters NOT AT ALL what @realDonaldTrump told John Bolton. We do not prosecute people for thoughts or words. Only for conduct. Ukraine got aid but did not announce investigation. Nothing wrong there. #maga2020," tweeted Toensing.
In this podcast, Toensing explains why she believes threatening to withhold foreign aid is standard practice in dealing with foreign nations and she does not believe President Trump did anything out of the ordinary.
Toensing also shares why she believes this saga had nothing to do with 2020 and everything to do with 2016.NoThe Greatest Threat Arising from the Impeachment Trialhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/spaldingOn Wednesday, lead impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., laid out why the Senate must act to remove Trump ahead of the November elections.

"The president's misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won," said Schiff.

That has Dr. Matthew Spalding, dean of Hillsdale College's Van Andel School of Government, very concerned.

"This is not about the technical impeachment in the Senate. They're playing to public opinion. They're playing for that election either way," said Spalding, who then offered how he believes Schiff and his allies are setting up the rest of this political year.

"'(They're thinking) If We remove him, that'd be great.' That's not going to happen, but that's what the issue is. 'And if we're not, how do we set it up so we weaken him in the election, but also if he goes on to win we can still maintain the argument that was illegitimate.' That's why this is all very dangerous for constitutional governance," said Spalding.

In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Spalding also walks through what the founders meant by "high crimes and misdemeanors," where the Constitution comes down on the Senate rules fight, and whether the parties would hold the exact opposite opinions if the party of the president were different.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22034442Sat, 25 Jan 2020 16:38:01 +0000Radio AmericaFriday wraps up the opening statements from the House Democrats serving as impeachment managers, and while they argue President Trump must be removed from office on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, one expert contends the...On Wednesday, lead impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., laid out why the Senate must act to remove Trump ahead of the November elections.

"The president's misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won," said Schiff.

That has Dr. Matthew Spalding, dean of Hillsdale College's Van Andel School of Government, very concerned.

"This is not about the technical impeachment in the Senate. They're playing to public opinion. They're playing for that election either way," said Spalding, who then offered how he believes Schiff and his allies are setting up the rest of this political year.

"'(They're thinking) If We remove him, that'd be great.' That's not going to happen, but that's what the issue is. 'And if we're not, how do we set it up so we weaken him in the election, but also if he goes on to win we can still maintain the argument that was illegitimate.' That's why this is all very dangerous for constitutional governance," said Spalding.

In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Spalding also walks through what the founders meant by "high crimes and misdemeanors," where the Constitution comes down on the Senate rules fight, and whether the parties would hold the exact opposite opinions if the party of the president were different.]]>793news,trump,elections,constitution,senate,impeachment,schiffcleanfullRadio AmericaFriday wraps up the opening statements from the House Democrats serving as impeachment managers, and while they argue President Trump must be removed from office on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, one expert contends the rationale given for not leaving the matter up to the voters is far more frightening than anything Trump allegedly did.
On Wednesday, lead impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., laid out why the Senate must act to remove Trump ahead of the November elections.
"The president's misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won," said Schiff.
That has Dr. Matthew Spalding, dean of Hillsdale College's Van Andel School of Government, very concerned.
"This is not about the technical impeachment in the Senate. They're playing to public opinion. They're playing for that election either way," said Spalding, who then offered how he believes Schiff and his allies are setting up the rest of this political year.
"'(They're thinking) If We remove him, that'd be great.' That's not going to happen, but that's what the issue is. 'And if we're not, how do we set it up so we weaken him in the election, but also if he goes on to win we can still maintain the argument that was illegitimate.' That's why this is all very dangerous for constitutional governance," said Spalding.
In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Spalding also walks through what the founders meant by "high crimes and misdemeanors," where the Constitution comes down on the Senate rules fight, and whether the parties would hold the exact opposite opinions if the party of the president were different.NoRep. Smith Talks March for Life, Dem Abortion Agendahttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/smith_1What is the significance of Trump appearing to speak at the rally? Just how far have Democrats tacked to the extreme on abortion? And where does the public actually stand?

New Jersey Rep. Chris Smith addressed all of these questions with Greg Corombos and fires back against the "pernicious lie" that pro-life activists only care about babies until they're born.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22034440Fri, 24 Jan 2020 22:20:26 +0000Radio AmericaPro-life activists flocked to Washington on Friday for the 47th Annual March for Life. And those in attendance witnessed the first ever in-person appearance at the march by a sitting U.S. president.
What is the significance of Trump appearing to...What is the significance of Trump appearing to speak at the rally? Just how far have Democrats tacked to the extreme on abortion? And where does the public actually stand?

New Jersey Rep. Chris Smith addressed all of these questions with Greg Corombos and fires back against the "pernicious lie" that pro-life activists only care about babies until they're born.]]>848life,for,march,democrats,nes,abortion,trump.cleanfullRadio AmericaPro-life activists flocked to Washington on Friday for the 47th Annual March for Life. And those in attendance witnessed the first ever in-person appearance at the march by a sitting U.S. president.
What is the significance of Trump appearing to speak at the rally? Just how far have Democrats tacked to the extreme on abortion? And where does the public actually stand?
New Jersey Rep. Chris Smith addressed all of these questions with Greg Corombos and fires back against the "pernicious lie" that pro-life activists only care about babies until they're born.NoTrump Promises Middle Class Tax Cuts Within Monthshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/sepp_10In this podcast, National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp tells Greg Corombos what Trump can do by executive action and what would require the cooperation of Congress. He also explains what unilateral action would do the most good for middle class families and what sort of tax relief might actually do more good than income tax cuts.

Finally, Sepp responds to arguments from Democrats that the 2017 tax cuts are largely responsible for the trillion-dollar deficits the nation now faces.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21998320Thu, 23 Jan 2020 22:02:32 +0000Radio AmericaDuring an interview with Fox Business Network this week, President Trump promised a middle class tax cut within the next ninety days, but what does he have in mind and what is politically possible?
In this podcast, National Taxpayers Union President...In this podcast, National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp tells Greg Corombos what Trump can do by executive action and what would require the cooperation of Congress. He also explains what unilateral action would do the most good for middle class families and what sort of tax relief might actually do more good than income tax cuts.

Finally, Sepp responds to arguments from Democrats that the 2017 tax cuts are largely responsible for the trillion-dollar deficits the nation now faces.]]>563news,taxes,trump,congresscleanfullRadio AmericaDuring an interview with Fox Business Network this week, President Trump promised a middle class tax cut within the next ninety days, but what does he have in mind and what is politically possible?
In this podcast, National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp tells Greg Corombos what Trump can do by executive action and what would require the cooperation of Congress. He also explains what unilateral action would do the most good for middle class families and what sort of tax relief might actually do more good than income tax cuts.
Finally, Sepp responds to arguments from Democrats that the 2017 tax cuts are largely responsible for the trillion-dollar deficits the nation now faces.NoThe Pro-Life Woman Exploited to Legalize Abortionhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/canoCano passed away in 2014, but in this interview from 2013, she explains how she got entangled in the fight to legalize abortion, how she found out she was the unwitting plaintiff in the case, the reaction of the pro-abortion attorneys when they realized she knew what they did, and her pro-life advocacy ever since.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21966106Wed, 22 Jan 2020 22:52:27 +0000Radio AmericaOn January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion nationwide through the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions. The plaintiff in the second case was known as "Mary Doe." Her real name was Sandra Cano. Only Sandra Cano had no idea she...Cano passed away in 2014, but in this interview from 2013, she explains how she got entangled in the fight to legalize abortion, how she found out she was the unwitting plaintiff in the case, the reaction of the pro-abortion attorneys when they realized she knew what they did, and her pro-life advocacy ever since.]]>773news,abortion,cano,doe,scotuscleanfullRadio AmericaOn January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion nationwide through the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions. The plaintiff in the second case was known as "Mary Doe." Her real name was Sandra Cano. Only Sandra Cano had no idea she was the plaintiff.
Cano passed away in 2014, but in this interview from 2013, she explains how she got entangled in the fight to legalize abortion, how she found out she was the unwitting plaintiff in the case, the reaction of the pro-abortion attorneys when they realized she knew what they did, and her pro-life advocacy ever since.NoTrump Takes on 'Birth Tourism'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/krikorian_1Current U.S. law, through the 14th amendment to the Constitution, confers citizenship on anyone born in the United States.

Center for Immigration Studies Executive Director Mark Krikorian says this is not just a matter of people timing vacations in order for mothers to give birth in the U.S. He says nations like China, Russia, Turkey, Nigeria, and others have active operations to transport, house, and care for mothers until the passports arrive for their children born as U.S. citizens.

In this interview with Greg Corombos, Krikorian explains how many babies become U.S. citizens through this process, what can actually be done about it, and what the future of birthright citizenship looks like.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21964772Wed, 22 Jan 2020 22:26:16 +0000Radio AmericaWhile Washington focuses on the impeachment process, President Trump is taking another step on immigration policy, this time targeting what's known as "birth tourism."
Current U.S. law, through the 14th amendment to the Constitution, confers...Current U.S. law, through the 14th amendment to the Constitution, confers citizenship on anyone born in the United States.

Center for Immigration Studies Executive Director Mark Krikorian says this is not just a matter of people timing vacations in order for mothers to give birth in the U.S. He says nations like China, Russia, Turkey, Nigeria, and others have active operations to transport, house, and care for mothers until the passports arrive for their children born as U.S. citizens.

In this interview with Greg Corombos, Krikorian explains how many babies become U.S. citizens through this process, what can actually be done about it, and what the future of birthright citizenship looks like.]]>535news,birth,trump,immigration,citizenship,tourismcleanfullRadio AmericaWhile Washington focuses on the impeachment process, President Trump is taking another step on immigration policy, this time targeting what's known as "birth tourism."
Current U.S. law, through the 14th amendment to the Constitution, confers citizenship on anyone born in the United States.
Center for Immigration Studies Executive Director Mark Krikorian says this is not just a matter of people timing vacations in order for mothers to give birth in the U.S. He says nations like China, Russia, Turkey, Nigeria, and others have active operations to transport, house, and care for mothers until the passports arrive for their children born as U.S. citizens.
In this interview with Greg Corombos, Krikorian explains how many babies become U.S. citizens through this process, what can actually be done about it, and what the future of birthright citizenship looks like.NoWhat Trump's Religious Freedom Directives Actually Dohttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/weber_1What is the current law concerning religious expression in government-funded schools? How closely are those laws currently being followed? What are Trump's orders designed to do? And what leverage does the government have against schools that refuse to accommodate that expression?

Family Research Council Vice President for Policy and Government Affairs Travis Weber joins Greg Corombos to address those questions and more.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21794324Fri, 17 Jan 2020 22:00:00 +0000Radio AmericaOn Thursday, President Trump issued nine rules designed to protect religious organizations from discrimination by the federal government. He's also taking steps to protect free religious expression in the public schools.
What is the current law...What is the current law concerning religious expression in government-funded schools? How closely are those laws currently being followed? What are Trump's orders designed to do? And what leverage does the government have against schools that refuse to accommodate that expression?

Family Research Council Vice President for Policy and Government Affairs Travis Weber joins Greg Corombos to address those questions and more.]]>579news,trump,freedom,religious,schoolscleanfullRadio AmericaOn Thursday, President Trump issued nine rules designed to protect religious organizations from discrimination by the federal government. He's also taking steps to protect free religious expression in the public schools.
What is the current law concerning religious expression in government-funded schools? How closely are those laws currently being followed? What are Trump's orders designed to do? And what leverage does the government have against schools that refuse to accommodate that expression?
Family Research Council Vice President for Policy and Government Affairs Travis Weber joins Greg Corombos to address those questions and more.NoWhy Small Businesses Could Be Big Winners in USMCAhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/kerriganWhat regulatory changes will help business owners keep costs down? How does the agreement give small business a much bigger voice in future trade deliberations? What additional provisions are included to protect intellectual property rights?

We get answers to those questions and discuss the ongoing trade talks with China with Karen Kerrigan, President and CEO of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21794329Fri, 17 Jan 2020 21:44:51 +0000Radio AmericaOn Thursday, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly approved the USMCA, the new North American trade compact among the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, and a leading small business advocate says there are plenty of changes to make life easier for American businesses...What regulatory changes will help business owners keep costs down? How does the agreement give small business a much bigger voice in future trade deliberations? What additional provisions are included to protect intellectual property rights?

We get answers to those questions and discuss the ongoing trade talks with China with Karen Kerrigan, President and CEO of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council.]]>744news,mexico,canada,trump,china,trade,regulations,usmcacleanfullRadio AmericaOn Thursday, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly approved the USMCA, the new North American trade compact among the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, and a leading small business advocate says there are plenty of changes to make life easier for American businesses and entrepreneurs.
What regulatory changes will help business owners keep costs down? How does the agreement give small business a much bigger voice in future trade deliberations? What additional provisions are included to protect intellectual property rights?
We get answers to those questions and discuss the ongoing trade talks with China with Karen Kerrigan, President and CEO of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council.NoIran Regime 'Not Ten Feet Tall'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/alireza_5Iranian opposition groups believe there is tremendous momentum towards ending the current Iranian regime. Alireza Jafarzadeh is deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, or NCRI.

He says two very important things happened last weekend. First, images and videos of the demonstrations actually got disseminated around the world. The Iranian government restored internet access in an attempt to benefit from coverage of the large gatherings following the killing of Gen. Qasem Soleimani and Jafarzadeh says the anti-regime protests began before the mourning events were finished, making transmission of the later protests impossible to stop.

Jafarzadeh also says the supportive tweets for the demonstrators from President Trump are very significant. In a series of tweets posted in Farsi, Trump said the United States stood with the people of Iran, warned the Iranian government not to kill its own people or cut off internet access, and call for a human rights commission to investigate Iranian crimes against their own people.

While he insists the work of changing governments rests with the Iranian people, Jafarzadeh says Trump and other world leaders provide a great service by publicly supporting the demonstrators.

"The role of the outside world and the international community is extremely important to build pressure on the Iranian regime, to make the people understand this regime is not ten feet tall," said Jafarzadeh. "This concerted effort, both from the outside and inside will eventually lead to the fall of the Iranian regime."

Listen to the full podcast as Jafarzadeh describes the size and intensity of the demonstrations, the conditions under which the regime would actually leave, and why he thinks it is more vulnerable than ever. He also describes the efforts of the Iranian government to attack the opposition inside and outside of Iraq - including him.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21759087Thu, 16 Jan 2020 22:46:39 +0000Radio AmericaLess than a week after attracting worldwide attention with their massive protests against their own government, the Iranian people continue their demonstrations, even as the media turn to impeachment and other matters closer to home.
Iranian...Iranian opposition groups believe there is tremendous momentum towards ending the current Iranian regime. Alireza Jafarzadeh is deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, or NCRI.

He says two very important things happened last weekend. First, images and videos of the demonstrations actually got disseminated around the world. The Iranian government restored internet access in an attempt to benefit from coverage of the large gatherings following the killing of Gen. Qasem Soleimani and Jafarzadeh says the anti-regime protests began before the mourning events were finished, making transmission of the later protests impossible to stop.

Jafarzadeh also says the supportive tweets for the demonstrators from President Trump are very significant. In a series of tweets posted in Farsi, Trump said the United States stood with the people of Iran, warned the Iranian government not to kill its own people or cut off internet access, and call for a human rights commission to investigate Iranian crimes against their own people.

While he insists the work of changing governments rests with the Iranian people, Jafarzadeh says Trump and other world leaders provide a great service by publicly supporting the demonstrators.

"The role of the outside world and the international community is extremely important to build pressure on the Iranian regime, to make the people understand this regime is not ten feet tall," said Jafarzadeh. "This concerted effort, both from the outside and inside will eventually lead to the fall of the Iranian regime."

Listen to the full podcast as Jafarzadeh describes the size and intensity of the demonstrations, the conditions under which the regime would actually leave, and why he thinks it is more vulnerable than ever. He also describes the efforts of the Iranian government to attack the opposition inside and outside of Iraq - including him.]]>822news,trump,protests,iran,regimecleanfullRadio AmericaLess than a week after attracting worldwide attention with their massive protests against their own government, the Iranian people continue their demonstrations, even as the media turn to impeachment and other matters closer to home.
Iranian opposition groups believe there is tremendous momentum towards ending the current Iranian regime. Alireza Jafarzadeh is deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, or NCRI.
He says two very important things happened last weekend. First, images and videos of the demonstrations actually got disseminated around the world. The Iranian government restored internet access in an attempt to benefit from coverage of the large gatherings following the killing of Gen. Qasem Soleimani and Jafarzadeh says the anti-regime protests began before the mourning events were finished, making transmission of the later protests impossible to stop.
Jafarzadeh also says the supportive tweets for the demonstrators from President Trump are very significant. In a series of tweets posted in Farsi, Trump said the United States stood with the people of Iran, warned the Iranian government not to kill its own people or cut off internet access, and call for a human rights commission to investigate Iranian crimes against their own people.
While he insists the work of changing governments rests with the Iranian people, Jafarzadeh says Trump and other world leaders provide a great service by publicly supporting the demonstrators.
"The role of the outside world and the international community is extremely important to build pressure on the Iranian regime, to make the people understand this regime is not ten feet tall," said Jafarzadeh. "This concerted effort, both from the outside and inside will eventually lead to the fall of the Iranian regime."
Listen to the full podcast as Jafarzadeh describes the size and intensity of the demonstrations, the conditions under which the regime would actually leave, and why he thinks it is more vulnerable than ever. He also describes the efforts of the Iranian government to attack the opposition inside and outside of Iraq - including him.NoTom Steyer Talks Debates, Climate, National Security & Morehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/steyerIn a conversation with Greg Corombos, Steyer explains what compelled him to run after initially deciding not to be a candidate. They also dive into Steyer's signature issue of climate change. What is his specific plan and is it realistic to think we can phase out fossil fuels entirely?

In Tuesday's debate, Steyer claimed his international business experience has prepared him to be commander-in-chief. But how does that kind of experience specifically prepare him for deciding whether to commit U.S. troops to combat?

In recent weeks, Steyer has climbed to double digits in polls of voters in the early primary and caucus states of Nevada and South Carolina. What's responsible for the surge?]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21725194Wed, 15 Jan 2020 21:58:56 +0000Radio AmericaBusinessman and activist Tom Steyer remains in the Democratic presidential race and on the debate stage long after other party hopefuls exited the race. But why is he there? What does he bring to the campaign that other Democrats do not?
In a...In a conversation with Greg Corombos, Steyer explains what compelled him to run after initially deciding not to be a candidate. They also dive into Steyer's signature issue of climate change. What is his specific plan and is it realistic to think we can phase out fossil fuels entirely?

In Tuesday's debate, Steyer claimed his international business experience has prepared him to be commander-in-chief. But how does that kind of experience specifically prepare him for deciding whether to commit U.S. troops to combat?

In recent weeks, Steyer has climbed to double digits in polls of voters in the early primary and caucus states of Nevada and South Carolina. What's responsible for the surge?]]>608news,military,war,democrats,tom,climate,sanders,2020,warren,steyercleanfullRadio AmericaBusinessman and activist Tom Steyer remains in the Democratic presidential race and on the debate stage long after other party hopefuls exited the race. But why is he there? What does he bring to the campaign that other Democrats do not?
In a conversation with Greg Corombos, Steyer explains what compelled him to run after initially deciding not to be a candidate. They also dive into Steyer's signature issue of climate change. What is his specific plan and is it realistic to think we can phase out fossil fuels entirely?
In Tuesday's debate, Steyer claimed his international business experience has prepared him to be commander-in-chief. But how does that kind of experience specifically prepare him for deciding whether to commit U.S. troops to combat?
In recent weeks, Steyer has climbed to double digits in polls of voters in the early primary and caucus states of Nevada and South Carolina. What's responsible for the surge?NoVirginia Embraces ERA; Fight Far from Overhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/stepman_1The Democratic-led chamber voted 59-41 to approve the amendment, also known as ERA. The problem for supporters is that Congress gave the states until 1982 to reach the 38-state threshold needed for ratification.

Undeterred, activists plan to push Congress to change the deadline so the votes in Virginia and a few others states that took place well after the deadline can count towards ratification.

Independent Women's Forum Senior Political Analyst Inez Stepman says it's not that simple. She says Congress set the window for ratification as part of the amendment itself, which was approved by a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate. She argues a two-thirds majority would also be needed to change the deadline.

Listen to the full podcast as Stepman explains the political and legal wrangling to come on this issue. She also explains why she believes the amendment is wholly unnecessary.

Finally, Stepman explains how the ERA could actually erode equality for women and girls.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21724298Wed, 15 Jan 2020 21:49:03 +0000Radio AmericaVirginia's House of Delegates approved the Equal Rights Amendment Wednesday, with supporters hailing the vote as the final step for ratification and critics pointing out the opportunity to enact it ended 38 years ago.
The Democratic-led chamber voted...The Democratic-led chamber voted 59-41 to approve the amendment, also known as ERA. The problem for supporters is that Congress gave the states until 1982 to reach the 38-state threshold needed for ratification.

Undeterred, activists plan to push Congress to change the deadline so the votes in Virginia and a few others states that took place well after the deadline can count towards ratification.

Independent Women's Forum Senior Political Analyst Inez Stepman says it's not that simple. She says Congress set the window for ratification as part of the amendment itself, which was approved by a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate. She argues a two-thirds majority would also be needed to change the deadline.

Listen to the full podcast as Stepman explains the political and legal wrangling to come on this issue. She also explains why she believes the amendment is wholly unnecessary.

Finally, Stepman explains how the ERA could actually erode equality for women and girls.]]>823news,women,military,sports,virginia,era,restrooms,ginsburgcleanfullRadio AmericaVirginia's House of Delegates approved the Equal Rights Amendment Wednesday, with supporters hailing the vote as the final step for ratification and critics pointing out the opportunity to enact it ended 38 years ago.
The Democratic-led chamber voted 59-41 to approve the amendment, also known as ERA. The problem for supporters is that Congress gave the states until 1982 to reach the 38-state threshold needed for ratification.
Undeterred, activists plan to push Congress to change the deadline so the votes in Virginia and a few others states that took place well after the deadline can count towards ratification.
Independent Women's Forum Senior Political Analyst Inez Stepman says it's not that simple. She says Congress set the window for ratification as part of the amendment itself, which was approved by a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate. She argues a two-thirds majority would also be needed to change the deadline.
Listen to the full podcast as Stepman explains the political and legal wrangling to come on this issue. She also explains why she believes the amendment is wholly unnecessary.
Finally, Stepman explains how the ERA could actually erode equality for women and girls.NoMany in Middle East Celebrate Demise of Soleimanihttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/gabriel_1Gabriel is the chairman of ACT for America, the largest grassroots national security organization in the U.S. and author of "Rise." A native of Lebanon and fluent in Arabic, Gabriel says many media reports in the Middle East show people joyful of Soleimani's death.

"The difference in coverage is shocking. A lot of the Arab Street is celebrating the death of Soleimani. They know that Soleimani was a bad man, not only in Iran but throughout the Arab Street, even in Egypt, even in Saudi Arabia. Even in those types of countries they understand. In Qatar, they understand the danger of Soleimani.

"In Iran, there are videos of people passing out candy. In the Middle East and Arabic culture, when they're celebrating a good event (such as) a wedding, a birth, an engagement, they pass out candy and bake cakes. After the death of Soleimani, they were baking cakes and passing out candies in the street. That was not covered in American media," said Gabriel.

And why were the people in Iran and elsewhere celebrating Soleimani's death? Gabriel says they all know Soleimani was critical to Iran's territorial ambitions throughout the region.

"Iran's tentacles reach throughout the whole Middle East as Iran tries to establish hegemony over the whole Middle East, " said Gabriel. "My own country of birth, Lebanon, went from being the Paris of the Middle East to now being basically a terrorist hub controlled by Hezbollah, which is funded by Iran."

Listen to the full podcast as Gabriel tells Radio America's Greg Corombos why she believes Soleimani's decades of carnage warranted the strike that killed him. She also discusses what can be done to encourage the Iranian protesters as they try to force massive change.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21687844Tue, 14 Jan 2020 21:37:52 +0000Radio AmericaWhile the American media portrays the U.S. strike killing Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani as controversial and deeply destabilizing to the region, terrorism expert Brigitte Gabriel says throughout the Middle East the news is being cheered by people and...Gabriel is the chairman of ACT for America, the largest grassroots national security organization in the U.S. and author of "Rise." A native of Lebanon and fluent in Arabic, Gabriel says many media reports in the Middle East show people joyful of Soleimani's death.

"The difference in coverage is shocking. A lot of the Arab Street is celebrating the death of Soleimani. They know that Soleimani was a bad man, not only in Iran but throughout the Arab Street, even in Egypt, even in Saudi Arabia. Even in those types of countries they understand. In Qatar, they understand the danger of Soleimani.

"In Iran, there are videos of people passing out candy. In the Middle East and Arabic culture, when they're celebrating a good event (such as) a wedding, a birth, an engagement, they pass out candy and bake cakes. After the death of Soleimani, they were baking cakes and passing out candies in the street. That was not covered in American media," said Gabriel.

And why were the people in Iran and elsewhere celebrating Soleimani's death? Gabriel says they all know Soleimani was critical to Iran's territorial ambitions throughout the region.

"Iran's tentacles reach throughout the whole Middle East as Iran tries to establish hegemony over the whole Middle East, " said Gabriel. "My own country of birth, Lebanon, went from being the Paris of the Middle East to now being basically a terrorist hub controlled by Hezbollah, which is funded by Iran."

Listen to the full podcast as Gabriel tells Radio America's Greg Corombos why she believes Soleimani's decades of carnage warranted the strike that killed him. She also discusses what can be done to encourage the Iranian protesters as they try to force massive change.]]>716media,obama,trump,iran,soleimanicleanfullRadio AmericaWhile the American media portrays the U.S. strike killing Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani as controversial and deeply destabilizing to the region, terrorism expert Brigitte Gabriel says throughout the Middle East the news is being cheered by people and nations increasingly worried about Iranian ambitions in the region.
Gabriel is the chairman of ACT for America, the largest grassroots national security organization in the U.S. and author of "Rise." A native of Lebanon and fluent in Arabic, Gabriel says many media reports in the Middle East show people joyful of Soleimani's death.
"The difference in coverage is shocking. A lot of the Arab Street is celebrating the death of Soleimani. They know that Soleimani was a bad man, not only in Iran but throughout the Arab Street, even in Egypt, even in Saudi Arabia. Even in those types of countries they understand. In Qatar, they understand the danger of Soleimani.
"In Iran, there are videos of people passing out candy. In the Middle East and Arabic culture, when they're celebrating a good event (such as) a wedding, a birth, an engagement, they pass out candy and bake cakes. After the death of Soleimani, they were baking cakes and passing out candies in the street. That was not covered in American media," said Gabriel.
And why were the people in Iran and elsewhere celebrating Soleimani's death? Gabriel says they all know Soleimani was critical to Iran's territorial ambitions throughout the region.
"Iran's tentacles reach throughout the whole Middle East as Iran tries to establish hegemony over the whole Middle East, " said Gabriel. "My own country of birth, Lebanon, went from being the Paris of the Middle East to now being basically a terrorist hub controlled by Hezbollah, which is funded by Iran."
Listen to the full podcast as Gabriel tells Radio America's Greg Corombos why she believes Soleimani's decades of carnage warranted the strike that killed him. She also discusses what can be done to encourage the Iranian protesters as they try to force massive change.NoRep. Wittman: Soleimani Strike Absolutely Justifiedhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/wittmanIn response, the House of Representatives spent much of Thursday approving a proposed update to the War Powers Act forbidding Trump from authorizing any strike on Iranian targets unless there is a confirmed imminent threat.

"We know from the intelligence and directly through Gen. Milley, who said that he looked at the intelligence. He saw that it was compelling and that an attack was imminent and it was very clear in its scale and scope. Those are his words.

"He was unequivocal in saying that Qasem Soleimani was planning and coordinating and synchronizing significant combat operations against U.S. military forces in the region and that this attack was imminent," said Wittman.

In this interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Rep. Wittman also details what impact the Democrats' proposed legislation would have on the president, why he's voting against it, and why the bill wouldn't make much difference even if it gets approved in the Senate as well. Finally, Wittman reacts to the news that Iran shot down the Ukrainian airliner that crashed in Iran Tuesday night and how Democrats derailed an attempt by Republicans to commend the military and intelligence personnel responsible for carrying out the targeting and killing of Soleimani.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21519392Thu, 09 Jan 2020 21:03:01 +0000Radio AmericaMany Democrats and some Republicans are furious that administration officials did not offer more specifics on what led to President Trump ordering the drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani and several high-ranking figures of Iranian...In response, the House of Representatives spent much of Thursday approving a proposed update to the War Powers Act forbidding Trump from authorizing any strike on Iranian targets unless there is a confirmed imminent threat.

"We know from the intelligence and directly through Gen. Milley, who said that he looked at the intelligence. He saw that it was compelling and that an attack was imminent and it was very clear in its scale and scope. Those are his words.

"He was unequivocal in saying that Qasem Soleimani was planning and coordinating and synchronizing significant combat operations against U.S. military forces in the region and that this attack was imminent," said Wittman.

In this interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Rep. Wittman also details what impact the Democrats' proposed legislation would have on the president, why he's voting against it, and why the bill wouldn't make much difference even if it gets approved in the Senate as well. Finally, Wittman reacts to the news that Iran shot down the Ukrainian airliner that crashed in Iran Tuesday night and how Democrats derailed an attempt by Republicans to commend the military and intelligence personnel responsible for carrying out the targeting and killing of Soleimani.]]>810news,trump,congress,iran,authority,threats,wittmancleanfullRadio AmericaMany Democrats and some Republicans are furious that administration officials did not offer more specifics on what led to President Trump ordering the drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani and several high-ranking figures of Iranian proxy militias in the Middle East.
In response, the House of Representatives spent much of Thursday approving a proposed update to the War Powers Act forbidding Trump from authorizing any strike on Iranian targets unless there is a confirmed imminent threat.
Virginia Rep. Rob Wittman sits on the House Armed Services Committee and attended the briefings offered this week by Trump administration officials, including Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley.
"We know from the intelligence and directly through Gen. Milley, who said that he looked at the intelligence. He saw that it was compelling and that an attack was imminent and it was very clear in its scale and scope. Those are his words.
"He was unequivocal in saying that Qasem Soleimani was planning and coordinating and synchronizing significant combat operations against U.S. military forces in the region and that this attack was imminent," said Wittman.
In this interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos, Rep. Wittman also details what impact the Democrats' proposed legislation would have on the president, why he's voting against it, and why the bill wouldn't make much difference even if it gets approved in the Senate as well. Finally, Wittman reacts to the news that Iran shot down the Ukrainian airliner that crashed in Iran Tuesday night and how Democrats derailed an attempt by Republicans to commend the military and intelligence personnel responsible for carrying out the targeting and killing of Soleimani.NoDel. Freitas: Dem Control in Virginia Means Less Freedom, Higher Taxeshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/freitas_7Democrats plan to pursue legislation on gun control, abortion, the environment, the Equal Rights Amendment, the minimum wage and many other issues.

In this podcast, GOP Del. Nick Freitas tells Greg Corombos about the legislative and legal battles to come, the areas where he thinks he can find common ground with Democrats.

And as Freitas pursues a congressional bid, he explains how the Democratic agenda in Virginia is a preview for what Democrats in Washington would pursue if they win the House, Senate, and White House in 2020.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21486295Wed, 08 Jan 2020 22:02:04 +0000Radio AmericaAs of Wednesday, Democrats now control the governor's office and both chambers of General Assembly in Virginia, and the new majorities are promising an aggressive progressive agenda over the next couple of months.
Democrats plan to pursue legislation...Democrats plan to pursue legislation on gun control, abortion, the environment, the Equal Rights Amendment, the minimum wage and many other issues.

In this podcast, GOP Del. Nick Freitas tells Greg Corombos about the legislative and legal battles to come, the areas where he thinks he can find common ground with Democrats.

And as Freitas pursues a congressional bid, he explains how the Democratic agenda in Virginia is a preview for what Democrats in Washington would pursue if they win the House, Senate, and White House in 2020.]]>652news,control,virginia,taxes,gun,democrats,2020cleanfullRadio AmericaAs of Wednesday, Democrats now control the governor's office and both chambers of General Assembly in Virginia, and the new majorities are promising an aggressive progressive agenda over the next couple of months.
Democrats plan to pursue legislation on gun control, abortion, the environment, the Equal Rights Amendment, the minimum wage and many other issues.
In this podcast, GOP Del. Nick Freitas tells Greg Corombos about the legislative and legal battles to come, the areas where he thinks he can find common ground with Democrats.
And as Freitas pursues a congressional bid, he explains how the Democratic agenda in Virginia is a preview for what Democrats in Washington would pursue if they win the House, Senate, and White House in 2020.NoHow Iran is Reacting to the Soleimani Strikehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/alireza_4But what are the short and long-term impacts on the Iranian regime of Soleimani's death? Are the Iranian people distraught at the news or celebrating his demise? Are the mass demonstrations organic or just propaganda? And what is Iran actually likely to do in response to the attack?

Listen to the podcast as Radio America's Greg Corombos gets answers to these questions and more from Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21416555Mon, 06 Jan 2020 21:58:33 +0000Radio AmericaLast week, a U.S. drone strike killed the commander of the Iranian Quds Force Gen. Kassem Soleimani and several other high-level figures connected to Iran's deadly efforts in Iraq and beyond. Iran is vowing revenge and is even putting a bounty on the...But what are the short and long-term impacts on the Iranian regime of Soleimani's death? Are the Iranian people distraught at the news or celebrating his demise? Are the mass demonstrations organic or just propaganda? And what is Iran actually likely to do in response to the attack?

Listen to the podcast as Radio America's Greg Corombos gets answers to these questions and more from Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.]]>613trump,iran,soleimani,khameinicleanfullRadio AmericaLast week, a U.S. drone strike killed the commander of the Iranian Quds Force Gen. Kassem Soleimani and several other high-level figures connected to Iran's deadly efforts in Iraq and beyond. Iran is vowing revenge and is even putting a bounty on the head of President Trump.
But what are the short and long-term impacts on the Iranian regime of Soleimani's death? Are the Iranian people distraught at the news or celebrating his demise? Are the mass demonstrations organic or just propaganda? And what is Iran actually likely to do in response to the attack?
Listen to the podcast as Radio America's Greg Corombos gets answers to these questions and more from Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.NoBig Questions - and Answers - Following Soleimani Strikehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/nash_4But the killing of Qassem Soleimani is sparking fierce debate. President Trump says he acted to stop a war while his critics claim he's on the brink of starting one. They also argue Trump should have sought congressional approval or at least consulted with Democratic leaders before commencing the strike. And are we on the verge of a full-scale war with Iran?

Retired U.S. Navy Capt. Chuck Nash studies Iran closely. In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Nash explains why he believes the attack on Soleimani and his associates was fully warranted, whether Trump had an obligation to inform Congress of the attack, the dilemma now facing Iranian leaders, and how a regime change inside Iran must happen from within.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21324261Fri, 03 Jan 2020 22:44:17 +0000Radio AmericaThe Iranian military figure responsible for targeting and killing thousands of people, including hundreds of U.S. troops, was killed in a drone strike in Iraq early Friday morning, along with several other key figures connected with Iranian-sponsored...But the killing of Qassem Soleimani is sparking fierce debate. President Trump says he acted to stop a war while his critics claim he's on the brink of starting one. They also argue Trump should have sought congressional approval or at least consulted with Democratic leaders before commencing the strike. And are we on the verge of a full-scale war with Iran?

Retired U.S. Navy Capt. Chuck Nash studies Iran closely. In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Nash explains why he believes the attack on Soleimani and his associates was fully warranted, whether Trump had an obligation to inform Congress of the attack, the dilemma now facing Iranian leaders, and how a regime change inside Iran must happen from within.]]>638news,trump,iran,terrorism,u.s.,soleimani,quds,irgccleanfullRadio AmericaThe Iranian military figure responsible for targeting and killing thousands of people, including hundreds of U.S. troops, was killed in a drone strike in Iraq early Friday morning, along with several other key figures connected with Iranian-sponsored terrorism in the Middle East.
But the killing of Qassem Soleimani is sparking fierce debate. President Trump says he acted to stop a war while his critics claim he's on the brink of starting one. They also argue Trump should have sought congressional approval or at least consulted with Democratic leaders before commencing the strike. And are we on the verge of a full-scale war with Iran?
Retired U.S. Navy Capt. Chuck Nash studies Iran closely. In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Nash explains why he believes the attack on Soleimani and his associates was fully warranted, whether Trump had an obligation to inform Congress of the attack, the dilemma now facing Iranian leaders, and how a regime change inside Iran must happen from within.NoVirginia Dems Plan ERA Showdownhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/inezThe Equal Rights Amendment, known as ERA, was approved by two-thirds majorities in the U.S. House and Senate in the 1970's but failed to reach the threshold of 38 states within the ten-year window Congress permitted to ratify it. Democrats believe they can can revive the effort while opponents say it officially died nearly 40 years ago.

What are the legal and political facts in this dispute? And what would the ERA actually do?

Independent Women's Forum Senior Political Analyst Inez Stepman says its states purpose of mandating equality between the sexes would be redundant since women enjoy the same rights as men. ]

However, she says the ERA could be very dangerous by not only declaring men and women equal but essentially interchangeable. And from separate public restrooms to men and women being eligible for the draft, Stepman says the impact could be far-reaching if supporters can overcome the political and legal hurdles.

"It could be an enormous legal change. If their legal theories are accepted and they ratify the ERA, all kinds of laws today that Americans take for granted could be constitutionally infirm and struck down by the courts," said Stepman.

Listen to the full podcast to learn what's at stake in this debate and how the fight is likely to play out.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21292384Thu, 02 Jan 2020 22:50:54 +0000Radio AmericaVirginia Democrats will take control of the General Assembly next week. And while their gun control agenda is receiving the vast majority of the media coverage, the Democrats are also planning to ratify the decades-old Equal Rights Amendment and...The Equal Rights Amendment, known as ERA, was approved by two-thirds majorities in the U.S. House and Senate in the 1970's but failed to reach the threshold of 38 states within the ten-year window Congress permitted to ratify it. Democrats believe they can can revive the effort while opponents say it officially died nearly 40 years ago.

What are the legal and political facts in this dispute? And what would the ERA actually do?

Independent Women's Forum Senior Political Analyst Inez Stepman says its states purpose of mandating equality between the sexes would be redundant since women enjoy the same rights as men. ]

However, she says the ERA could be very dangerous by not only declaring men and women equal but essentially interchangeable. And from separate public restrooms to men and women being eligible for the draft, Stepman says the impact could be far-reaching if supporters can overcome the political and legal hurdles.

"It could be an enormous legal change. If their legal theories are accepted and they ratify the ERA, all kinds of laws today that Americans take for granted could be constitutionally infirm and struck down by the courts," said Stepman.

Listen to the full podcast to learn what's at stake in this debate and how the fight is likely to play out.]]>782news,virginia,era,democrats,constitutioncleanfullRadio AmericaVirginia Democrats will take control of the General Assembly next week. And while their gun control agenda is receiving the vast majority of the media coverage, the Democrats are also planning to ratify the decades-old Equal Rights Amendment and claim that vote will officially add the amendment to the Constitution.
The Equal Rights Amendment, known as ERA, was approved by two-thirds majorities in the U.S. House and Senate in the 1970's but failed to reach the threshold of 38 states within the ten-year window Congress permitted to ratify it. Democrats believe they can can revive the effort while opponents say it officially died nearly 40 years ago.
What are the legal and political facts in this dispute? And what would the ERA actually do?
Independent Women's Forum Senior Political Analyst Inez Stepman says its states purpose of mandating equality between the sexes would be redundant since women enjoy the same rights as men. ]
However, she says the ERA could be very dangerous by not only declaring men and women equal but essentially interchangeable. And from separate public restrooms to men and women being eligible for the draft, Stepman says the impact could be far-reaching if supporters can overcome the political and legal hurdles.
"It could be an enormous legal change. If their legal theories are accepted and they ratify the ERA, all kinds of laws today that Americans take for granted could be constitutionally infirm and struck down by the courts," said Stepman.
Listen to the full podcast to learn what's at stake in this debate and how the fight is likely to play out.NoShould the Electoral College Survive?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/electoralBut the Constitution says the president is selected through the Electoral College, a system that focuses on which candidates win each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia.

What did the founding fathers have in mind when they created the Electoral College? Does it still serve it's purpose centuries later? And why do advocates for determining winners through the popular vote believe their approach is more fair?

Radio America's Alexandra Lavin speaks with both sides and explores the effort from some states to give the popular vote the final say without actually changing the Constitution.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20933388Mon, 30 Dec 2019 17:00:12 +0000Radio AmericaMany Democrats are demanding a new system for electing our presidents. The effort stems from Democrats losing two presidential elections within 16 years despite winning the popular vote.
But the Constitution says the president is selected through...But the Constitution says the president is selected through the Electoral College, a system that focuses on which candidates win each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia.

What did the founding fathers have in mind when they created the Electoral College? Does it still serve it's purpose centuries later? And why do advocates for determining winners through the popular vote believe their approach is more fair?

Radio America's Alexandra Lavin speaks with both sides and explores the effort from some states to give the popular vote the final say without actually changing the Constitution.]]>362college,electoral,elections,constitution,compactcleanfullRadio AmericaMany Democrats are demanding a new system for electing our presidents. The effort stems from Democrats losing two presidential elections within 16 years despite winning the popular vote.
But the Constitution says the president is selected through the Electoral College, a system that focuses on which candidates win each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia.
What did the founding fathers have in mind when they created the Electoral College? Does it still serve it's purpose centuries later? And why do advocates for determining winners through the popular vote believe their approach is more fair?
Radio America's Alexandra Lavin speaks with both sides and explores the effort from some states to give the popular vote the final say without actually changing the Constitution.NoRep. Yoho Details Agricultural Guest Worker Planhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/yoho-gwYoho represents an agriculture-heavy district. He says it's simply a fact that guest workers are needed in the industry but the U.S. must do a much better job keeping track of who is coming in and how to find them if they overstay their visas.

In this podcast, Yoho describes how his legislation requires far greater scrutiny on who can enter the nation as a guest worker, what would and would not be required of employers who hire them, the importance of E-Verify in making sure all workers are in the country legally and much more. He also addresses whether Republicans and Democrats can find any common ground on this issue.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20931985Thu, 26 Dec 2019 17:00:12 +0000Radio AmericaImmigration reform remains very elusive in Washington as Republicans and Democrats seemingly find less and less common ground as the debate continues. Florida Rep. Ted Yoho believes comprehensive legislation is highly unlikely and a bad idea anyway,...Yoho represents an agriculture-heavy district. He says it's simply a fact that guest workers are needed in the industry but the U.S. must do a much better job keeping track of who is coming in and how to find them if they overstay their visas.

In this podcast, Yoho describes how his legislation requires far greater scrutiny on who can enter the nation as a guest worker, what would and would not be required of employers who hire them, the importance of E-Verify in making sure all workers are in the country legally and much more. He also addresses whether Republicans and Democrats can find any common ground on this issue.]]>616guest,immigration,congress,worker,agricultural,yohocleanfullRadio AmericaImmigration reform remains very elusive in Washington as Republicans and Democrats seemingly find less and less common ground as the debate continues. Florida Rep. Ted Yoho believes comprehensive legislation is highly unlikely and a bad idea anyway, so he's taking aim at improving the guest worker program for agricultural workers.
Yoho represents an agriculture-heavy district. He says it's simply a fact that guest workers are needed in the industry but the U.S. must do a much better job keeping track of who is coming in and how to find them if they overstay their visas.
In this podcast, Yoho describes how his legislation requires far greater scrutiny on who can enter the nation as a guest worker, what would and would not be required of employers who hire them, the importance of E-Verify in making sure all workers are in the country legally and much more. He also addresses whether Republicans and Democrats can find any common ground on this issue.NoCalifornia Crushes the Gig Economyhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/greszler_1The goal was to prevent independent contractors from being exploited. In reality, it's putting them out of work. Instead of complying with the new mandatory bureaucracy, businesses are severing ties with their outside talent and stories of websites and other businesses announcing massive layoffs are widespread.

What exactly does the legislation require of employers? Why are they choosing to release freelance professionals instead of making them actual employees? And what will happen once the real impact of this law is understood?

In this podcast, we discuss those questions and others with Rachel Greszler, research fellow in economics, budget, and entitlements at the Heritage Foundation.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20932188Mon, 23 Dec 2019 17:00:10 +0000Radio AmericaEarlier this year, California lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom enacted legislation they promised would protect independent workers. Passed by the Democratic-dominated legislature, the law requires businesses to treat freelance workers like formal...The goal was to prevent independent contractors from being exploited. In reality, it's putting them out of work. Instead of complying with the new mandatory bureaucracy, businesses are severing ties with their outside talent and stories of websites and other businesses announcing massive layoffs are widespread.

What exactly does the legislation require of employers? Why are they choosing to release freelance professionals instead of making them actual employees? And what will happen once the real impact of this law is understood?

In this podcast, we discuss those questions and others with Rachel Greszler, research fellow in economics, budget, and entitlements at the Heritage Foundation.]]>476news,california,economy,gig,regulations,greszlercleanfullRadio AmericaEarlier this year, California lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom enacted legislation they promised would protect independent workers. Passed by the Democratic-dominated legislature, the law requires businesses to treat freelance workers like formal employees.
The goal was to prevent independent contractors from being exploited. In reality, it's putting them out of work. Instead of complying with the new mandatory bureaucracy, businesses are severing ties with their outside talent and stories of websites and other businesses announcing massive layoffs are widespread.
What exactly does the legislation require of employers? Why are they choosing to release freelance professionals instead of making them actual employees? And what will happen once the real impact of this law is understood?
In this podcast, we discuss those questions and others with Rachel Greszler, research fellow in economics, budget, and entitlements at the Heritage Foundation.NoIn Memoriam 2019: Music, Television, & Filmhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/entertainmentIn this podcast, we look back legends from the world of entertainment. We remember one of the iconic singers and actresses from Hollywood's golden age, groundbreaking music acts from rock and roll to pop to opera. We'll also look back at television stars from Sesame Street to phenomenal comedic and dramatic actors in television and the movies.

Join us for this remembrance. And please look for our other tribute segments focusing on famous figures from politics and business and from media and sports.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20939051Sat, 21 Dec 2019 05:14:37 +0000Radio AmericaOver the past 12 months, we've bid farewell to some of our favorite entertainers. From music to television to film, these performers created songs or characters that will remain with us long after they've departed.
In this podcast, we look back...In this podcast, we look back legends from the world of entertainment. We remember one of the iconic singers and actresses from Hollywood's golden age, groundbreaking music acts from rock and roll to pop to opera. We'll also look back at television stars from Sesame Street to phenomenal comedic and dramatic actors in television and the movies.

Join us for this remembrance. And please look for our other tribute segments focusing on famous figures from politics and business and from media and sports.]]>600film,music,entertainment,television,day,norman,conway,memoriam,tork,spinneycleanfullRadio AmericaOver the past 12 months, we've bid farewell to some of our favorite entertainers. From music to television to film, these performers created songs or characters that will remain with us long after they've departed.
In this podcast, we look back legends from the world of entertainment. We remember one of the iconic singers and actresses from Hollywood's golden age, groundbreaking music acts from rock and roll to pop to opera. We'll also look back at television stars from Sesame Street to phenomenal comedic and dramatic actors in television and the movies.
Join us for this remembrance. And please look for our other tribute segments focusing on famous figures from politics and business and from media and sports.NoIn Memoriam 2019: Media & Sportshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/sportsThis list includes a trailblazing female journalist, a legendary sports broadcaster, winners of the first two Superbowls, baseball hall of famers, and one of the winningest basketball players of all time.

Join us as we remember these legends. And please find our segments on those we lost in politics and business and in entertainment.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20939021Sat, 21 Dec 2019 05:06:11 +0000Radio AmericaAs we prepare to close the books on 2019, we take time to remember those famous names and faces who left us from all walks of life. In this segment, we will look back at prominent figures in media and sports who died this year.
This list includes a...This list includes a trailblazing female journalist, a legendary sports broadcaster, winners of the first two Superbowls, baseball hall of famers, and one of the winningest basketball players of all time.

Join us as we remember these legends. And please find our segments on those we lost in politics and business and in entertainment.]]>406news,media,robinson,sports,starr,roberts,whitaker,havlicekcleanfullRadio AmericaAs we prepare to close the books on 2019, we take time to remember those famous names and faces who left us from all walks of life. In this segment, we will look back at prominent figures in media and sports who died this year.
This list includes a trailblazing female journalist, a legendary sports broadcaster, winners of the first two Superbowls, baseball hall of famers, and one of the winningest basketball players of all time.
Join us as we remember these legends. And please find our segments on those we lost in politics and business and in entertainment.NoIn Memoriam 2019: Politics & Businesshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/political-obitOur list includes a Supreme Court justice, the billionaire businessman who shook up politics in the 1990's, many long-serving lawmakers, an auto industry titan and many more.

Listen to the full podcast to hear our tributes to prominent figures in these areas and do not miss our other podcasts remembering those we lost in media and sports and in entertainment.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20938968Sat, 21 Dec 2019 04:59:15 +0000Radio America2019 brought us many headlines, including the sad news of the deaths of many famous people. In this section, we will remember key figures in politics and business.
Our list includes a Supreme Court justice, the billionaire businessman who shook up...Our list includes a Supreme Court justice, the billionaire businessman who shook up politics in the 1990's, many long-serving lawmakers, an auto industry titan and many more.

Listen to the full podcast to hear our tributes to prominent figures in these areas and do not miss our other podcasts remembering those we lost in media and sports and in entertainment.]]>493news,politics,business,stevens,perot,baghdadi,iacoccacleanfullRadio America2019 brought us many headlines, including the sad news of the deaths of many famous people. In this section, we will remember key figures in politics and business.
Our list includes a Supreme Court justice, the billionaire businessman who shook up politics in the 1990's, many long-serving lawmakers, an auto industry titan and many more.
Listen to the full podcast to hear our tributes to prominent figures in these areas and do not miss our other podcasts remembering those we lost in media and sports and in entertainment.NoAppeals Court Calls Obamacare Mandate Unconstitutionalhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/henneke_4It's the latest ruling in a case brought by the attorneys general of many states and individual plaintiffs claiming the mandate has caused great harm.

The court is now trying to decide whether it's ruling means Obamacare must come crashing down without the individual mandate or whether the rest of the law can stand without the mandate.

Rob Henneke of the Center for the American Future at the Texas Public Policy Foundation is the lead attorney for the individuals taking legal aim at the individual mandate. He explains the significance of Wednesday's decision, why he believes Obamacare cannot survive without the individual mandate, and why this fight may end up at the Supreme Court sooner than most people expect.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20902921Thu, 19 Dec 2019 23:50:50 +0000Radio AmericaThe effort to strike down the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, is another step closer to reality after a three-judge panel of the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the individual mandate is unconstitutional.
It's the latest...It's the latest ruling in a case brought by the attorneys general of many states and individual plaintiffs claiming the mandate has caused great harm.

The court is now trying to decide whether it's ruling means Obamacare must come crashing down without the individual mandate or whether the rest of the law can stand without the mandate.

Rob Henneke of the Center for the American Future at the Texas Public Policy Foundation is the lead attorney for the individuals taking legal aim at the individual mandate. He explains the significance of Wednesday's decision, why he believes Obamacare cannot survive without the individual mandate, and why this fight may end up at the Supreme Court sooner than most people expect.]]>766news,courts,aca,obamacare,mandate,hennekecleanfullRadio AmericaThe effort to strike down the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, is another step closer to reality after a three-judge panel of the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the individual mandate is unconstitutional.
It's the latest ruling in a case brought by the attorneys general of many states and individual plaintiffs claiming the mandate has caused great harm.
The court is now trying to decide whether it's ruling means Obamacare must come crashing down without the individual mandate or whether the rest of the law can stand without the mandate.
Rob Henneke of the Center for the American Future at the Texas Public Policy Foundation is the lead attorney for the individuals taking legal aim at the individual mandate. He explains the significance of Wednesday's decision, why he believes Obamacare cannot survive without the individual mandate, and why this fight may end up at the Supreme Court sooner than most people expect.No'Neither Side is Interested in Spending Restraint'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/adam_4The House votes on Tuesday enjoyed support from dozens of GOP members.

Openthebooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski says Democrats are open about wanting to spend more and more money and many Republicans often end up being hypocrites who run on fiscal conservatism but vote for bloated appropriations packages like this one.

Andrzejewski details how bad our deficit spending is right now, how soon the U.S. may have to pay the piper at this rate, and what can be done to address the problem.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20865635Wed, 18 Dec 2019 22:07:49 +0000Radio AmericaAs Congress prepares to pass another $1.4 trillion in government spending and President Trump prepares to sign it, why are both parties abdicating responsibility for fiscal stewardship?
The House votes on Tuesday enjoyed support from dozens of GOP...The House votes on Tuesday enjoyed support from dozens of GOP members.

Openthebooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski says Democrats are open about wanting to spend more and more money and many Republicans often end up being hypocrites who run on fiscal conservatism but vote for bloated appropriations packages like this one.

Andrzejewski details how bad our deficit spending is right now, how soon the U.S. may have to pay the piper at this rate, and what can be done to address the problem.]]>616news,trump,congress,debt,spending,entitlementscleanfullRadio AmericaAs Congress prepares to pass another $1.4 trillion in government spending and President Trump prepares to sign it, why are both parties abdicating responsibility for fiscal stewardship?
The House votes on Tuesday enjoyed support from dozens of GOP members.
Openthebooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski says Democrats are open about wanting to spend more and more money and many Republicans often end up being hypocrites who run on fiscal conservatism but vote for bloated appropriations packages like this one.
Andrzejewski details how bad our deficit spending is right now, how soon the U.S. may have to pay the piper at this rate, and what can be done to address the problem.NoSen. Rand Paul Talks Spending Bill, Afghanistan, Impeachmenthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/paul"The nicest thing I can say about them would be they're an abomination," laughed Paul. "They're terrible. People who vote for this are not fiscally conservative. There's nothing conservative about this."

In the podcast, Paul also explains why a majority of Republicans are uninterested in fiscal discipline along with the vast majority of Democrats.

Sen. Paul also reacts to the Washington Post reports revealing that the Bush and Obama administrations really didn't know what to do in Afghanistan and both actively deceived the American people about progress that wasn't really happening. What policy does Paul think would make the most sense and prevent Afghanistan from breeding more terrorist attacks.

And listen as Sen. Paul offers his preview of the impeachment trial headed to the U.S. Senate come January.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20835571Tue, 17 Dec 2019 22:00:59 +0000Radio AmericaSen. Rand Paul is not holding back his disgust for the bloated spending contained in the bills to fund the federal government through September 2020.
"The nicest thing I can say about them would be they're an abomination," laughed Paul. "They're..."The nicest thing I can say about them would be they're an abomination," laughed Paul. "They're terrible. People who vote for this are not fiscally conservative. There's nothing conservative about this."

In the podcast, Paul also explains why a majority of Republicans are uninterested in fiscal discipline along with the vast majority of Democrats.

Sen. Paul also reacts to the Washington Post reports revealing that the Bush and Obama administrations really didn't know what to do in Afghanistan and both actively deceived the American people about progress that wasn't really happening. What policy does Paul think would make the most sense and prevent Afghanistan from breeding more terrorist attacks.

And listen as Sen. Paul offers his preview of the impeachment trial headed to the U.S. Senate come January.]]>413news,afghanistan,paul,budget,spending,impeachment,randcleanfullRadio AmericaSen. Rand Paul is not holding back his disgust for the bloated spending contained in the bills to fund the federal government through September 2020.
"The nicest thing I can say about them would be they're an abomination," laughed Paul. "They're terrible. People who vote for this are not fiscally conservative. There's nothing conservative about this."
In the podcast, Paul also explains why a majority of Republicans are uninterested in fiscal discipline along with the vast majority of Democrats.
Sen. Paul also reacts to the Washington Post reports revealing that the Bush and Obama administrations really didn't know what to do in Afghanistan and both actively deceived the American people about progress that wasn't really happening. What policy does Paul think would make the most sense and prevent Afghanistan from breeding more terrorist attacks.
And listen as Sen. Paul offers his preview of the impeachment trial headed to the U.S. Senate come January.NoWhat The UK Elections Mean for the U.S.https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/ilanPrime Minister Boris Johnson now has plenty of breathing room to pursue his brand of Brexit while Labor tries to figure out what went wrong.

So why did the Conservative Party far exceed all expectations? Was it simply a desire to resolve Brexit or is there something more? Why did voters soundly reject Labor and where does it go from here.

And most importantly, what do these results mean for the British relationship with the United States?

We discuss all of this and more with Ilan Berman, vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20727262Sat, 14 Dec 2019 03:29:56 +0000Radio AmericaThe Conservative Party far surpassed expectations in Thursday's parliamentary elections, winning 364 seats and crushing the Labor Party's hopes of scoring an upset.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson now has plenty of breathing room to pursue his brand of...Prime Minister Boris Johnson now has plenty of breathing room to pursue his brand of Brexit while Labor tries to figure out what went wrong.

So why did the Conservative Party far exceed all expectations? Was it simply a desire to resolve Brexit or is there something more? Why did voters soundly reject Labor and where does it go from here.

And most importantly, what do these results mean for the British relationship with the United States?

We discuss all of this and more with Ilan Berman, vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council.]]>495news,uk,conservatives,labor,johnson,corbyn,brexitcleanfullRadio AmericaThe Conservative Party far surpassed expectations in Thursday's parliamentary elections, winning 364 seats and crushing the Labor Party's hopes of scoring an upset.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson now has plenty of breathing room to pursue his brand of Brexit while Labor tries to figure out what went wrong.
So why did the Conservative Party far exceed all expectations? Was it simply a desire to resolve Brexit or is there something more? Why did voters soundly reject Labor and where does it go from here.
And most importantly, what do these results mean for the British relationship with the United States?
We discuss all of this and more with Ilan Berman, vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council.NoMcCarthy Dissects Impeachment Articleshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy-impeachWhy did Democrats decide on these articles? How strong is their case? And why did they not accuse Trump of bribery after weeks of suggesting he engaged in that?

We get answers from former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy, author of "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency."]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20637761Wed, 11 Dec 2019 15:40:25 +0000Radio AmericaOn Tuesday, House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Trump. The Judiciary Committee will soon approve charges that Trump committed abuse of power and obstruction of Congress in connection to the Ukraine controversy.
Why...Why did Democrats decide on these articles? How strong is their case? And why did they not accuse Trump of bribery after weeks of suggesting he engaged in that?

We get answers from former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy, author of "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency."]]>647news,trump,democrats,impeachment,ukraine,briberycleanfullRadio AmericaOn Tuesday, House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Trump. The Judiciary Committee will soon approve charges that Trump committed abuse of power and obstruction of Congress in connection to the Ukraine controversy.
Why did Democrats decide on these articles? How strong is their case? And why did they not accuse Trump of bribery after weeks of suggesting he engaged in that?
We get answers from former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy, author of "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency."NoIG Report Skewers FBI Over FISA Warrantshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy-igHorowitz concluded that there was no provable political bias that went into some 17 major errors in filing for the warrants, including the admission of obviously false information about Page and Trump and the exclusion of exculpatory information. He also did not refer anyone for criminal prosecution.

Democrats and former FBI officials declared this a win for their position and a death blow to the idea that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign in 2016.

But former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy says there's plenty in the report which is very ugly for the FBI and everyone up the chain of command.

Listen to the full podcast as McCarthy tells Greg Corombos what stood out to him in the report, what's still to come in the investigation led by U.S. Attorney John Durham and whether Horowitz is right to be worried that the rights of everyday Americans are at great risk of being trampled if the FBI acted in such a shoddy manner in a case of great national significance.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20637685Tue, 10 Dec 2019 21:50:39 +0000Radio AmericaOn Monday, Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz released his long-awaited report on the FBI's handling of FISA warrant requests and renewals concerning one-time Trump campaign figure Carter Page.
Horowitz concluded that there was no...Horowitz concluded that there was no provable political bias that went into some 17 major errors in filing for the warrants, including the admission of obviously false information about Page and Trump and the exclusion of exculpatory information. He also did not refer anyone for criminal prosecution.

Democrats and former FBI officials declared this a win for their position and a death blow to the idea that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign in 2016.

But former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy says there's plenty in the report which is very ugly for the FBI and everyone up the chain of command.

Listen to the full podcast as McCarthy tells Greg Corombos what stood out to him in the report, what's still to come in the investigation led by U.S. Attorney John Durham and whether Horowitz is right to be worried that the rights of everyday Americans are at great risk of being trampled if the FBI acted in such a shoddy manner in a case of great national significance.]]>699news,doj,fbi,carter,page,2016,ig,fisa,horowitzcleanfullRadio AmericaOn Monday, Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz released his long-awaited report on the FBI's handling of FISA warrant requests and renewals concerning one-time Trump campaign figure Carter Page.
Horowitz concluded that there was no provable political bias that went into some 17 major errors in filing for the warrants, including the admission of obviously false information about Page and Trump and the exclusion of exculpatory information. He also did not refer anyone for criminal prosecution.
Democrats and former FBI officials declared this a win for their position and a death blow to the idea that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign in 2016.
But former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy says there's plenty in the report which is very ugly for the FBI and everyone up the chain of command.
Listen to the full podcast as McCarthy tells Greg Corombos what stood out to him in the report, what's still to come in the investigation led by U.S. Attorney John Durham and whether Horowitz is right to be worried that the rights of everyday Americans are at great risk of being trampled if the FBI acted in such a shoddy manner in a case of great national significance.NoIran Crackdown Creates Bigger Protestshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/alireza_3The Iranian regime is lashing out against the demonstrators with far more ferocity than in previous protests, but the repression seems to be making more people mad and the protests just keep growing.

"There's nothing that can stop it, no matter how mush pressure the regime exerts," said Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the National Council of Resistance of Iran office in Washington.

He explained why the Iranian government is acting far more viciously towards its own people in this round of protests.

"You're talking about a regime that is paranoid. It's weak. It's vulnerable, and people now feel that they have the momentum on their side," said Jafarzadeh.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Jafarzadeh explain the extent of the deadly repression and the most important thing the U.S. can do to help the demonstrators.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20537461Sat, 07 Dec 2019 00:36:43 +0000Radio AmericaSince mid-November, Iranian citizens have filled the streets in scores of cities in all 31 of the nation's provinces to denounce the mullahs and the Rouhani government.
The Iranian regime is lashing out against the demonstrators with far more...The Iranian regime is lashing out against the demonstrators with far more ferocity than in previous protests, but the repression seems to be making more people mad and the protests just keep growing.

"There's nothing that can stop it, no matter how mush pressure the regime exerts," said Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the National Council of Resistance of Iran office in Washington.

He explained why the Iranian government is acting far more viciously towards its own people in this round of protests.

"You're talking about a regime that is paranoid. It's weak. It's vulnerable, and people now feel that they have the momentum on their side," said Jafarzadeh.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Jafarzadeh explain the extent of the deadly repression and the most important thing the U.S. can do to help the demonstrators.]]>870cleanfullRadio AmericaSince mid-November, Iranian citizens have filled the streets in scores of cities in all 31 of the nation's provinces to denounce the mullahs and the Rouhani government.
The Iranian regime is lashing out against the demonstrators with far more ferocity than in previous protests, but the repression seems to be making more people mad and the protests just keep growing.
"There's nothing that can stop it, no matter how mush pressure the regime exerts," said Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the National Council of Resistance of Iran office in Washington.
He explained why the Iranian government is acting far more viciously towards its own people in this round of protests.
"You're talking about a regime that is paranoid. It's weak. It's vulnerable, and people now feel that they have the momentum on their side," said Jafarzadeh.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Jafarzadeh explain the extent of the deadly repression and the most important thing the U.S. can do to help the demonstrators.NoMcClintock Talks Impeachment, Slams Demshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mcclintockCalifornia Republican Rep. Tom McClintock is member of the House Judiciary Committee. He tells Greg Corombos why he sees nothing in President Trump's conduct that warrants impeachment.

Listen to the full podcast, as McClintock also explains what he thinks of the Trump-Zelensky phone call, Trump's request for Ukraine to investigate the Bidens, Wednesday's testimony from constitutional law professors, and much more.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20513617Thu, 05 Dec 2019 22:22:05 +0000Radio AmericaAfter one hearing in the House Judiciary Committee, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is directing committee chairman Jerry Nadler to begin drafting articles of impeachment. What's behind the timing of that decision and what articles could be coming?...California Republican Rep. Tom McClintock is member of the House Judiciary Committee. He tells Greg Corombos why he sees nothing in President Trump's conduct that warrants impeachment.

Listen to the full podcast, as McClintock also explains what he thinks of the Trump-Zelensky phone call, Trump's request for Ukraine to investigate the Bidens, Wednesday's testimony from constitutional law professors, and much more.]]>548news,trump,pelosi,impeachment,ukraine,nadlercleanfullRadio AmericaAfter one hearing in the House Judiciary Committee, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is directing committee chairman Jerry Nadler to begin drafting articles of impeachment. What's behind the timing of that decision and what articles could be coming?
California Republican Rep. Tom McClintock is member of the House Judiciary Committee. He tells Greg Corombos why he sees nothing in President Trump's conduct that warrants impeachment.
Listen to the full podcast, as McClintock also explains what he thinks of the Trump-Zelensky phone call, Trump's request for Ukraine to investigate the Bidens, Wednesday's testimony from constitutional law professors, and much more.NoGun Control, Sanctuaries and the Second Amendment: Inside Virginia's Big Political Battlehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/edwardsIn addition to the usual legislative goals of universal background checks, red flag laws, and bans on semi-automatic"assault style" rifles, legislation put forth by the incoming Senate majority leader would make it illegal to possess guns that were purchased legally but subsequently banned by his bill.

In response, dozens of counties and other Virginia localities are adopting sanctuary policies, effectively announcing their sheriffs will not enforce any laws they believe to be in violation of the second amendment.

So what are the Democrats proposing exactly? Do the counties have the right to defy state laws? And will Virginia Democrats likely end up passing aggressive gun control legislation or something less severe.

Greg Corombos discusses all of this and more with Bearing Arms Editor-in-Chief Cam Edwards.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20488485Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:41:25 +0000Radio AmericaOn Nov. 5, Democrats won majorities in both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly. Democrats officially take control in January but party leaders are already rolling out an aggressive gun control agenda.
In addition to the usual legislative...In addition to the usual legislative goals of universal background checks, red flag laws, and bans on semi-automatic"assault style" rifles, legislation put forth by the incoming Senate majority leader would make it illegal to possess guns that were purchased legally but subsequently banned by his bill.

In response, dozens of counties and other Virginia localities are adopting sanctuary policies, effectively announcing their sheriffs will not enforce any laws they believe to be in violation of the second amendment.

So what are the Democrats proposing exactly? Do the counties have the right to defy state laws? And will Virginia Democrats likely end up passing aggressive gun control legislation or something less severe.

Greg Corombos discusses all of this and more with Bearing Arms Editor-in-Chief Cam Edwards.]]>541news,guns,control,virginia,gun,democrats,confiscation,sanctuariescleanfullRadio AmericaOn Nov. 5, Democrats won majorities in both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly. Democrats officially take control in January but party leaders are already rolling out an aggressive gun control agenda.
In addition to the usual legislative goals of universal background checks, red flag laws, and bans on semi-automatic"assault style" rifles, legislation put forth by the incoming Senate majority leader would make it illegal to possess guns that were purchased legally but subsequently banned by his bill.
In response, dozens of counties and other Virginia localities are adopting sanctuary policies, effectively announcing their sheriffs will not enforce any laws they believe to be in violation of the second amendment.
So what are the Democrats proposing exactly? Do the counties have the right to defy state laws? And will Virginia Democrats likely end up passing aggressive gun control legislation or something less severe.
Greg Corombos discusses all of this and more with Bearing Arms Editor-in-Chief Cam Edwards.NoYoung Conservatives Fight Back Against Socialist Pushhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/zegersBut why is socialism popular, particularly among young adults? While many have difficulty articulating their views, others have embraced the idea of "democratic socialism" as espoused by Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Young Americans Against Socialism CEO Morgan Zegers sees this up close on a daily basis. After having an avowed communist as a good friend and college roommate, Zegers decided her generation needed to push back against the political tide.

In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Zegers details how she responds to the appeal of democratic socialism and why the facts of history are on her side. She also stresses that conservatives need to befriend and not mock those who really don't know why they like socialism.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20462777Wed, 04 Dec 2019 21:54:14 +0000Radio AmericaSocialism is getting increasingly popular. A recent Gallup poll shows 49 percent of Millennials and Gen Z have a favorable view of socialism. Other surveys show as many as 57 percent embrace it. And while the numbers are far different among Gen X...But why is socialism popular, particularly among young adults? While many have difficulty articulating their views, others have embraced the idea of "democratic socialism" as espoused by Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Young Americans Against Socialism CEO Morgan Zegers sees this up close on a daily basis. After having an avowed communist as a good friend and college roommate, Zegers decided her generation needed to push back against the political tide.

In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Zegers details how she responds to the appeal of democratic socialism and why the facts of history are on her side. She also stresses that conservatives need to befriend and not mock those who really don't know why they like socialism.]]>428news,z,college,socialism,capitalism,gen,millennial,zegerscleanfullRadio AmericaSocialism is getting increasingly popular. A recent Gallup poll shows 49 percent of Millennials and Gen Z have a favorable view of socialism. Other surveys show as many as 57 percent embrace it. And while the numbers are far different among Gen X and Boomers, roughly a third of them give socialism a thumbs up too.
But why is socialism popular, particularly among young adults? While many have difficulty articulating their views, others have embraced the idea of "democratic socialism" as espoused by Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Young Americans Against Socialism CEO Morgan Zegers sees this up close on a daily basis. After having an avowed communist as a good friend and college roommate, Zegers decided her generation needed to push back against the political tide.
In this conversation with Greg Corombos, Zegers details how she responds to the appeal of democratic socialism and why the facts of history are on her side. She also stresses that conservatives need to befriend and not mock those who really don't know why they like socialism.NoFact vs. Fiction on Trump & Ukrainehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_13But while Chairman Adam Schiff and his allies believe the evidence of impeachable offenses is overwhelming, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy sees things much differently.

Author of "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig An Election and Destroy a Presidency," McCarthy explains why he is underwhelmed by the impeachment report.

Democrats argue that the facts everyone agrees on - such as the details of the Trump-Zelensky phone call - ought to be enough to warrant Trump's removal from office. McCarthy explains why he disagrees with that too.

And as the rhetoric flies about why Ukraine did and did not do during the 2016 campaign, McCarthy separates which allegations about Ukrainian interference are absurd and what actually happened based on the best evidence available.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20462621Tue, 03 Dec 2019 21:57:40 +0000Radio AmericaOn Tuesday, Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee released their impeachment report, arguing that President Trump deliberately and repeatedly abused the power of his office for his personal political benefit through his demands towards...But while Chairman Adam Schiff and his allies believe the evidence of impeachable offenses is overwhelming, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy sees things much differently.

Author of "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig An Election and Destroy a Presidency," McCarthy explains why he is underwhelmed by the impeachment report.

Democrats argue that the facts everyone agrees on - such as the details of the Trump-Zelensky phone call - ought to be enough to warrant Trump's removal from office. McCarthy explains why he disagrees with that too.

And as the rhetoric flies about why Ukraine did and did not do during the 2016 campaign, McCarthy separates which allegations about Ukrainian interference are absurd and what actually happened based on the best evidence available.]]>1006news,trump,impeachment,schiff,ukraine,2016,report.cleanfullRadio AmericaOn Tuesday, Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee released their impeachment report, arguing that President Trump deliberately and repeatedly abused the power of his office for his personal political benefit through his demands towards Ukraine.
But while Chairman Adam Schiff and his allies believe the evidence of impeachable offenses is overwhelming, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy sees things much differently.
Author of "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig An Election and Destroy a Presidency," McCarthy explains why he is underwhelmed by the impeachment report.
Democrats argue that the facts everyone agrees on - such as the details of the Trump-Zelensky phone call - ought to be enough to warrant Trump's removal from office. McCarthy explains why he disagrees with that too.
And as the rhetoric flies about why Ukraine did and did not do during the 2016 campaign, McCarthy separates which allegations about Ukrainian interference are absurd and what actually happened based on the best evidence available.NoFreitas Runs for Congresshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/freitas_5Freitas is a U.S. Army veteran, a Green Beret who served two tours in Iraq. He was first elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2015 and about to begin his third term there after winning re-election as a write-in candidate. In 2018, Freitas sought the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate but narrowly lost in the primary.

The seventh district is currently represented by Democrat Abigail Spanberger, who won a tight race against incumbent GOP Rep. Dave Brat in 2018. Freitas says Spanberger ran as a moderate but votes with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi nearly 90 percent of the time. He also slammed Spanberger for enthusiastically supporting the effort to impeach President Trump.

Freitas says the district is far more conservative than Spanberger and it's time for more accurate representation. He believes there is a fundamental difference in how Republicans and Democrats approach their jobs and he's betting the voters will be much more comfortable with his philosophy.

"Whenever I hear about Democrats solving common-sense problems, it seems like their starting point is always how do we empower the government to do more," said Freitas.

"When I look around at how we solve problems in the private sector, what I see is efficient solutions that people like, that they have a choice to engage in the marketplace with, and they're inherently peaceful," he added.

Listen to the full podcast to hear what Freitas thinks of President Trump, how he will deal with a Virginia that is increasingly tilting towards the Democrats and just how far left the Virginia legislature is planning to go when Democrats take full control in January.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20436442Mon, 02 Dec 2019 22:08:56 +0000Radio AmericaFresh off re-election to his state legislative office Republican Virginia Del. Nick Freitas is launching a congressional campaign in the commonwealth's seventh district.
Freitas is a U.S. Army veteran, a Green Beret who served two tours in Iraq. He...Freitas is a U.S. Army veteran, a Green Beret who served two tours in Iraq. He was first elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2015 and about to begin his third term there after winning re-election as a write-in candidate. In 2018, Freitas sought the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate but narrowly lost in the primary.

The seventh district is currently represented by Democrat Abigail Spanberger, who won a tight race against incumbent GOP Rep. Dave Brat in 2018. Freitas says Spanberger ran as a moderate but votes with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi nearly 90 percent of the time. He also slammed Spanberger for enthusiastically supporting the effort to impeach President Trump.

Freitas says the district is far more conservative than Spanberger and it's time for more accurate representation. He believes there is a fundamental difference in how Republicans and Democrats approach their jobs and he's betting the voters will be much more comfortable with his philosophy.

"Whenever I hear about Democrats solving common-sense problems, it seems like their starting point is always how do we empower the government to do more," said Freitas.

"When I look around at how we solve problems in the private sector, what I see is efficient solutions that people like, that they have a choice to engage in the marketplace with, and they're inherently peaceful," he added.

Listen to the full podcast to hear what Freitas thinks of President Trump, how he will deal with a Virginia that is increasingly tilting towards the Democrats and just how far left the Virginia legislature is planning to go when Democrats take full control in January.]]>907news,virginia,trump,congress,2020,freitas,spanbergercleanfullRadio AmericaFresh off re-election to his state legislative office Republican Virginia Del. Nick Freitas is launching a congressional campaign in the commonwealth's seventh district.
Freitas is a U.S. Army veteran, a Green Beret who served two tours in Iraq. He was first elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2015 and about to begin his third term there after winning re-election as a write-in candidate. In 2018, Freitas sought the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate but narrowly lost in the primary.
The seventh district is currently represented by Democrat Abigail Spanberger, who won a tight race against incumbent GOP Rep. Dave Brat in 2018. Freitas says Spanberger ran as a moderate but votes with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi nearly 90 percent of the time. He also slammed Spanberger for enthusiastically supporting the effort to impeach President Trump.
Freitas says the district is far more conservative than Spanberger and it's time for more accurate representation. He believes there is a fundamental difference in how Republicans and Democrats approach their jobs and he's betting the voters will be much more comfortable with his philosophy.
"Whenever I hear about Democrats solving common-sense problems, it seems like their starting point is always how do we empower the government to do more," said Freitas.
"When I look around at how we solve problems in the private sector, what I see is efficient solutions that people like, that they have a choice to engage in the marketplace with, and they're inherently peaceful," he added.
Listen to the full podcast to hear what Freitas thinks of President Trump, how he will deal with a Virginia that is increasingly tilting towards the Democrats and just how far left the Virginia legislature is planning to go when Democrats take full control in January.No'In Our Weakness, God Is Strong'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/pateBut in 2014, Carmen was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and, even after a bone marrow transplant, the cancer has relapsed multiple times.

But even as she battles for her life yet again, Carmen's faith is an inspiration to many as she travels the halls of her Houston cancer ward encouraging and evangelizing other patients, their families, and the medical staff.

Following a 2018 relapse, Carmen turned her Facebook journal of her cancer fight and trust in God into a book entitled "In Our Weakness, God is Strong."

In this uplifting podcast, Carmen tells Greg Corombos how her faith prepared her for this grueling health challenge, how she encourages others to prepare before a crisis hits them, and why she feels called to share her faith with those she meets.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20294356Wed, 27 Nov 2019 16:35:03 +0000Radio AmericaCarmen Pate has been very active in ministry and in pro-life activism for many years. As you can hear in the podcast, she is a woman of passion and energy.
But in 2014, Carmen was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and, even after a bone...But in 2014, Carmen was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and, even after a bone marrow transplant, the cancer has relapsed multiple times.

But even as she battles for her life yet again, Carmen's faith is an inspiration to many as she travels the halls of her Houston cancer ward encouraging and evangelizing other patients, their families, and the medical staff.

Following a 2018 relapse, Carmen turned her Facebook journal of her cancer fight and trust in God into a book entitled "In Our Weakness, God is Strong."

In this uplifting podcast, Carmen tells Greg Corombos how her faith prepared her for this grueling health challenge, how she encourages others to prepare before a crisis hits them, and why she feels called to share her faith with those she meets.]]>812news,faith,evangelism,cancer,leukemia,patecleanfullRadio AmericaCarmen Pate has been very active in ministry and in pro-life activism for many years. As you can hear in the podcast, she is a woman of passion and energy.
But in 2014, Carmen was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and, even after a bone marrow transplant, the cancer has relapsed multiple times.
But even as she battles for her life yet again, Carmen's faith is an inspiration to many as she travels the halls of her Houston cancer ward encouraging and evangelizing other patients, their families, and the medical staff.
Following a 2018 relapse, Carmen turned her Facebook journal of her cancer fight and trust in God into a book entitled "In Our Weakness, God is Strong."
In this uplifting podcast, Carmen tells Greg Corombos how her faith prepared her for this grueling health challenge, how she encourages others to prepare before a crisis hits them, and why she feels called to share her faith with those she meets.NoWhy Rep. Yoho Won't Support USMCAhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/yoho-usmcaFlorida Rep. Ted Yoho tells Greg Corombos how impeachment is gumming up the legislative works but he also details why he cannot support USMCA in it's current form...and why he doesn't think it has the votes to pass at all.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20294723Tue, 26 Nov 2019 20:49:33 +0000Radio AmericaHouse Republicans are hammering Speaker Nancy Pelosi for putting legislative business on hold while the impeachment process plays out. At the top of their grievance list is the inaction on the USMCA, the trade agreement among the U.S., Canada, and...Florida Rep. Ted Yoho tells Greg Corombos how impeachment is gumming up the legislative works but he also details why he cannot support USMCA in it's current form...and why he doesn't think it has the votes to pass at all.]]>486news,trade,pelosi,impeachment,yoho,usmcacleanfullRadio AmericaHouse Republicans are hammering Speaker Nancy Pelosi for putting legislative business on hold while the impeachment process plays out. At the top of their grievance list is the inaction on the USMCA, the trade agreement among the U.S., Canada, and Mexico designed to replace NAFTA.
Florida Rep. Ted Yoho tells Greg Corombos how impeachment is gumming up the legislative works but he also details why he cannot support USMCA in it's current form...and why he doesn't think it has the votes to pass at all.NoCongress Kicks Spending Can Down the Road Againhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/gosarBut while shutdown theater was avoided for another month, Congress is yet again failing to go through an orderly appropriations process, by which congressional committees go line by line through spending bills for each department of government.

In recent years, regardless of which party controls the House and Senate, members have funded the government through continuing resolutions that temporarily keep spending levels intact or by voting on giant take-it-or-leave-it omnibus bills that give members no chance to make changes. The omnibus bills invariably result in higher spending.

"We have put way too much power into the hands of the speakers. We need to have a process that's generated from the members from their different committees. The chairmen should be picked by members of the committees so they are beholden to the members, not beholden to leadership," said Gosar, a member of the House Freedom Caucus.

On Thursday, before approving the continuing resolution, the U.S. Senate voted to table, or delay, Sen. Rand Paul's push for the "Penny Plan," which calls for eliminating one penny of each dollar in federal spending. More than half of Senate Republicans voted to put off consideration of the plan.

Gosar is not surprised.

"A lot is said when your leader actually says, 'Nobody loses office by spending money,'" said Gosar, apparently referring to Senate Majority Leader Mich McConnell. "It shows people are not serious about the process here."

Listen to the full podcast to hear more of Gosar's ideas for returning to more responsible spending. He also explains why he believed Republicans lost the majority in the House of Representatives because of their unfulfilled promises and not because of President Trump.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20174587Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:36:56 +0000Radio AmericaWhile the impeachment hearings attracted most of the news coverage on Capitol Hill this week, both the House and Senate agreed to a continuing resolution to keep the government funded until December 20.
But while shutdown theater was avoided for...But while shutdown theater was avoided for another month, Congress is yet again failing to go through an orderly appropriations process, by which congressional committees go line by line through spending bills for each department of government.

In recent years, regardless of which party controls the House and Senate, members have funded the government through continuing resolutions that temporarily keep spending levels intact or by voting on giant take-it-or-leave-it omnibus bills that give members no chance to make changes. The omnibus bills invariably result in higher spending.

"We have put way too much power into the hands of the speakers. We need to have a process that's generated from the members from their different committees. The chairmen should be picked by members of the committees so they are beholden to the members, not beholden to leadership," said Gosar, a member of the House Freedom Caucus.

On Thursday, before approving the continuing resolution, the U.S. Senate voted to table, or delay, Sen. Rand Paul's push for the "Penny Plan," which calls for eliminating one penny of each dollar in federal spending. More than half of Senate Republicans voted to put off consideration of the plan.

Gosar is not surprised.

"A lot is said when your leader actually says, 'Nobody loses office by spending money,'" said Gosar, apparently referring to Senate Majority Leader Mich McConnell. "It shows people are not serious about the process here."

Listen to the full podcast to hear more of Gosar's ideas for returning to more responsible spending. He also explains why he believed Republicans lost the majority in the House of Representatives because of their unfulfilled promises and not because of President Trump.]]>640news,house,senate,congress,spending,deficitscleanfullRadio AmericaWhile the impeachment hearings attracted most of the news coverage on Capitol Hill this week, both the House and Senate agreed to a continuing resolution to keep the government funded until December 20.
But while shutdown theater was avoided for another month, Congress is yet again failing to go through an orderly appropriations process, by which congressional committees go line by line through spending bills for each department of government.
In recent years, regardless of which party controls the House and Senate, members have funded the government through continuing resolutions that temporarily keep spending levels intact or by voting on giant take-it-or-leave-it omnibus bills that give members no chance to make changes. The omnibus bills invariably result in higher spending.
Arizona GOP Rep. Paul Gosar says too often the Speaker of the House, whether Republican or Democrat, unilaterally decides what federal spending is going to look like.
"We have put way too much power into the hands of the speakers. We need to have a process that's generated from the members from their different committees. The chairmen should be picked by members of the committees so they are beholden to the members, not beholden to leadership," said Gosar, a member of the House Freedom Caucus.
On Thursday, before approving the continuing resolution, the U.S. Senate voted to table, or delay, Sen. Rand Paul's push for the "Penny Plan," which calls for eliminating one penny of each dollar in federal spending. More than half of Senate Republicans voted to put off consideration of the plan.
Gosar is not surprised.
"A lot is said when your leader actually says, 'Nobody loses office by spending money,'" said Gosar, apparently referring to Senate Majority Leader Mich McConnell. "It shows people are not serious about the process here."
Listen to the full podcast to hear more of Gosar's ideas for returning to more responsible spending. He also explains why he believed Republicans lost the majority in the House of Representatives because of their unfulfilled promises and not because of President Trump.NoNetanyahu Charged: What's Next in Israel?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/berman_5On Thursday, Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit announced Netanyahu is charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. Bribery carries a maximum sentence of ten years while the other charges could bring an additional three years. The allegations stem from allegations Netanyahu accepted gifts in exchange for political favors and also provided regulatory relief to two major media outlets in exchange for favorable coverage.

Netanyahu says the indictments are politically motivated and contends it may be time to "investigate the investigators."

All of this comes as Netanyahu serves as a caretaker prime minister in Israel. Parliamentary elections were held in Israel in September. Netanyahu and chief rival Benny Gantz finished in a virtual dead heat, but neither party was anywhere close to holding a majority in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset.

Netanyahu was given the first chance to form a coalition government with smaller parties but he failed. Gantz was then given the opportunity to forge a majority government and also failed. Right now, the Knesset is tasked with choosing a prime minister or another election will have to be scheduled.

Is the evidence against Netanyahu compelling or a political smear as he alleges? Do these charges change the political dynamics in Israel or are loyalties largely entrenched as they are in the U.S.? And would new elections actually lead to a decisive winner or just result in another stalemate?

We address these questions and more as Greg Corombos interviews American Foreign Policy Council Vice President Ilan Berman.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20173297Thu, 21 Nov 2019 22:00:18 +0000Radio AmericaIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is already in the midst of a political drama and now he's facing a legal one too.
On Thursday, Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit announced Netanyahu is charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of...On Thursday, Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit announced Netanyahu is charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. Bribery carries a maximum sentence of ten years while the other charges could bring an additional three years. The allegations stem from allegations Netanyahu accepted gifts in exchange for political favors and also provided regulatory relief to two major media outlets in exchange for favorable coverage.

Netanyahu says the indictments are politically motivated and contends it may be time to "investigate the investigators."

All of this comes as Netanyahu serves as a caretaker prime minister in Israel. Parliamentary elections were held in Israel in September. Netanyahu and chief rival Benny Gantz finished in a virtual dead heat, but neither party was anywhere close to holding a majority in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset.

Netanyahu was given the first chance to form a coalition government with smaller parties but he failed. Gantz was then given the opportunity to forge a majority government and also failed. Right now, the Knesset is tasked with choosing a prime minister or another election will have to be scheduled.

Is the evidence against Netanyahu compelling or a political smear as he alleges? Do these charges change the political dynamics in Israel or are loyalties largely entrenched as they are in the U.S.? And would new elections actually lead to a decisive winner or just result in another stalemate?

We address these questions and more as Greg Corombos interviews American Foreign Policy Council Vice President Ilan Berman.]]>486news,israel,gantz,elections,netanyahu,indictmentcleanfullRadio AmericaIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is already in the midst of a political drama and now he's facing a legal one too.
On Thursday, Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit announced Netanyahu is charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. Bribery carries a maximum sentence of ten years while the other charges could bring an additional three years. The allegations stem from allegations Netanyahu accepted gifts in exchange for political favors and also provided regulatory relief to two major media outlets in exchange for favorable coverage.
Netanyahu says the indictments are politically motivated and contends it may be time to "investigate the investigators."
All of this comes as Netanyahu serves as a caretaker prime minister in Israel. Parliamentary elections were held in Israel in September. Netanyahu and chief rival Benny Gantz finished in a virtual dead heat, but neither party was anywhere close to holding a majority in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset.
Netanyahu was given the first chance to form a coalition government with smaller parties but he failed. Gantz was then given the opportunity to forge a majority government and also failed. Right now, the Knesset is tasked with choosing a prime minister or another election will have to be scheduled.
Is the evidence against Netanyahu compelling or a political smear as he alleges? Do these charges change the political dynamics in Israel or are loyalties largely entrenched as they are in the U.S.? And would new elections actually lead to a decisive winner or just result in another stalemate?
We address these questions and more as Greg Corombos interviews American Foreign Policy Council Vice President Ilan Berman.NoAndy McCarthy: Sondland Testimony Hurts GOP Defense, Still Doesn't Rise to Impeachmenthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_11McCarthy, who served as Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, is the author of "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency." He is also a contributing editor and columnist at National Review Online and a Fox News Channel contributor.

On Wednesday, Sondland says President Trump directed him to work with presidential attorney Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine policy. Sondland says Giuliani insisted on Ukraine publicly announcing an investigation into the 2016 elections and the energy company Burisma in exchange for an Oval Office meeting for Ukrainian President Vlodomyr Zelensky.

Burisma is the energy company that paid Hunter Biden huge sums of money to sit on its board of directors during the latter years of the Obama administration while Joe Biden was vice president. Sondland says he never considered that the effort to probe Burisma was really an effort to investigate the Bidens.

Sondland also says he never got an answer as to why $400 million in military aid to Ukraine was held up but he "presumes" it was also in an effort to compel the investigations.

McCarthy says the most significant impact of Wednesday's testimony is that it proved the Republicans mounted the wrong defense by insisting there was no quid pro quo.

"I think it was a real mistake to fight the idea that there was a quid pro quo since there's virtually always a quid pro quo in foreign relations. If you're going to do an effective defense in any kind of an adversarial proceeding, you don't want to be fighting a pitched battle on something you can't win.

"I've thought it was a mistake all along for the Republicans and the president to base their defense on the idea there was no quid pro quo when there's a lot of evidence that there was," said McCarthy.

McCarthy says the best defense from the beginning would have been to explain how the allegations simply do not rise to the level of impeachment. He refers to this controversy as the "Seinfeld" impeachment, because it's a high crime and misdemeanor about nothing.

He also says the founders did not intend impeachment to be used in a scenario like this.

"They were worried that the powerful presidency they had just created could be co-opted by a foreign power, so the might of the United States was being used for the foreign power rather than the American people.

So what they put bribery in there for was to fill this gap to address the possibility that a president essentially gets purchased by a foreign power, that is the foreign power bribes the president so that the president does the foreign power's bidding rather than the American people's bidding. We don't have anything close to that here," said McCarthy.

Listen to the full podcast to hear more of McCarthy's assessment of Sondland's testimony, his response to the assertion Ukraine only got the military aid after the whistleblower's complaint surfaced, and where he thinks the likelihood impeachment currently stands.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20150487Wed, 20 Nov 2019 22:45:33 +0000Radio AmericaU.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland says there was a quid pro quo pushed by the Trump administration, an assertion that damages the defense put foerward by President Trump and his Republican allies, but former federal prosecutor...McCarthy, who served as Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, is the author of "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency." He is also a contributing editor and columnist at National Review Online and a Fox News Channel contributor.

On Wednesday, Sondland says President Trump directed him to work with presidential attorney Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine policy. Sondland says Giuliani insisted on Ukraine publicly announcing an investigation into the 2016 elections and the energy company Burisma in exchange for an Oval Office meeting for Ukrainian President Vlodomyr Zelensky.

Burisma is the energy company that paid Hunter Biden huge sums of money to sit on its board of directors during the latter years of the Obama administration while Joe Biden was vice president. Sondland says he never considered that the effort to probe Burisma was really an effort to investigate the Bidens.

Sondland also says he never got an answer as to why $400 million in military aid to Ukraine was held up but he "presumes" it was also in an effort to compel the investigations.

McCarthy says the most significant impact of Wednesday's testimony is that it proved the Republicans mounted the wrong defense by insisting there was no quid pro quo.

"I think it was a real mistake to fight the idea that there was a quid pro quo since there's virtually always a quid pro quo in foreign relations. If you're going to do an effective defense in any kind of an adversarial proceeding, you don't want to be fighting a pitched battle on something you can't win.

"I've thought it was a mistake all along for the Republicans and the president to base their defense on the idea there was no quid pro quo when there's a lot of evidence that there was," said McCarthy.

McCarthy says the best defense from the beginning would have been to explain how the allegations simply do not rise to the level of impeachment. He refers to this controversy as the "Seinfeld" impeachment, because it's a high crime and misdemeanor about nothing.

He also says the founders did not intend impeachment to be used in a scenario like this.

"They were worried that the powerful presidency they had just created could be co-opted by a foreign power, so the might of the United States was being used for the foreign power rather than the American people.

So what they put bribery in there for was to fill this gap to address the possibility that a president essentially gets purchased by a foreign power, that is the foreign power bribes the president so that the president does the foreign power's bidding rather than the American people's bidding. We don't have anything close to that here," said McCarthy.

Listen to the full podcast to hear more of McCarthy's assessment of Sondland's testimony, his response to the assertion Ukraine only got the military aid after the whistleblower's complaint surfaced, and where he thinks the likelihood impeachment currently stands.]]>975news,trump,impeachment,ukraine,giuliani,sondlandcleanfullRadio AmericaU.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland says there was a quid pro quo pushed by the Trump administration, an assertion that damages the defense put foerward by President Trump and his Republican allies, but former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy says the facts simply don't warrant impeachment.
McCarthy, who served as Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, is the author of "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency." He is also a contributing editor and columnist at National Review Online and a Fox News Channel contributor.
On Wednesday, Sondland says President Trump directed him to work with presidential attorney Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine policy. Sondland says Giuliani insisted on Ukraine publicly announcing an investigation into the 2016 elections and the energy company Burisma in exchange for an Oval Office meeting for Ukrainian President Vlodomyr Zelensky.
Burisma is the energy company that paid Hunter Biden huge sums of money to sit on its board of directors during the latter years of the Obama administration while Joe Biden was vice president. Sondland says he never considered that the effort to probe Burisma was really an effort to investigate the Bidens.
Sondland also says he never got an answer as to why $400 million in military aid to Ukraine was held up but he "presumes" it was also in an effort to compel the investigations.
McCarthy says the most significant impact of Wednesday's testimony is that it proved the Republicans mounted the wrong defense by insisting there was no quid pro quo.
"I think it was a real mistake to fight the idea that there was a quid pro quo since there's virtually always a quid pro quo in foreign relations. If you're going to do an effective defense in any kind of an adversarial proceeding, you don't want to be fighting a pitched battle on something you can't win.
"I've thought it was a mistake all along for the Republicans and the president to base their defense on the idea there was no quid pro quo when there's a lot of evidence that there was," said McCarthy.
McCarthy says the best defense from the beginning would have been to explain how the allegations simply do not rise to the level of impeachment. He refers to this controversy as the "Seinfeld" impeachment, because it's a high crime and misdemeanor about nothing.
He also says the founders did not intend impeachment to be used in a scenario like this.
"They were worried that the powerful presidency they had just created could be co-opted by a foreign power, so the might of the United States was being used for the foreign power rather than the American people.
So what they put bribery in there for was to fill this gap to address the possibility that a president essentially gets purchased by a foreign power, that is the foreign power bribes the president so that the president does the foreign power's bidding rather than the American people's bidding. We don't have anything close to that here," said McCarthy.
Listen to the full podcast to hear more of McCarthy's assessment of Sondland's testimony, his response to the assertion Ukraine only got the military aid after the whistleblower's complaint surfaced, and where he thinks the likelihood impeachment currently stands.NoThe Dems' Other Target: Alaska Governor Addresses Recall Efforthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/dunleavyGov. Mike Dunleavy won the Alaska governor's race in 2018, promising to restore fiscal order in the state. Upon entering office in December of last year, he immediately began cutting spending. The cuts included reductions to the University of Alaska system and Medicaid payments among many other areas. By the end of February, a recall effort was already underway.

"We put in some pretty stiff reductions. And, really, there were reductions across the board and they hit a lot of programs.

"They hit programs that touched upon debt reimbursement for municipalities, university, and hit some of our vulnerable populations - homelessness and some of our seniors," said Dunleavy.

But he says aggressive action had to be taken. Without it, Alaska would be in difficult financial straits.

"We would have gone through our savings this year. We'd have no savings left and we'd be staring at some pretty stiff, draconian taxes," said Dunleavy.

Recall supporters gathered more than 49,000 signatures but state officials rejected the premise for it. That ruling is now being challenged in court.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Gov. Dunleavy's reaction to the recall and his analysis of why cutting spending draws such fierce opposition in both parties - whether in Alaska or in Washington.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20126332Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:12:50 +0000Radio AmericaWhile virtually all of the political oxygen is being consumed by the impeachment hearings in Washington, Democrats are looking to remove another Republican executive as well.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy won the Alaska governor's race in 2018, promising to...Gov. Mike Dunleavy won the Alaska governor's race in 2018, promising to restore fiscal order in the state. Upon entering office in December of last year, he immediately began cutting spending. The cuts included reductions to the University of Alaska system and Medicaid payments among many other areas. By the end of February, a recall effort was already underway.

"We put in some pretty stiff reductions. And, really, there were reductions across the board and they hit a lot of programs.

"They hit programs that touched upon debt reimbursement for municipalities, university, and hit some of our vulnerable populations - homelessness and some of our seniors," said Dunleavy.

But he says aggressive action had to be taken. Without it, Alaska would be in difficult financial straits.

"We would have gone through our savings this year. We'd have no savings left and we'd be staring at some pretty stiff, draconian taxes," said Dunleavy.

Recall supporters gathered more than 49,000 signatures but state officials rejected the premise for it. That ruling is now being challenged in court.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Gov. Dunleavy's reaction to the recall and his analysis of why cutting spending draws such fierce opposition in both parties - whether in Alaska or in Washington.]]>728news,taxes,spending,alaska,recall,dunleavycleanfullRadio AmericaWhile virtually all of the political oxygen is being consumed by the impeachment hearings in Washington, Democrats are looking to remove another Republican executive as well.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy won the Alaska governor's race in 2018, promising to restore fiscal order in the state. Upon entering office in December of last year, he immediately began cutting spending. The cuts included reductions to the University of Alaska system and Medicaid payments among many other areas. By the end of February, a recall effort was already underway.
"We put in some pretty stiff reductions. And, really, there were reductions across the board and they hit a lot of programs.
"They hit programs that touched upon debt reimbursement for municipalities, university, and hit some of our vulnerable populations - homelessness and some of our seniors," said Dunleavy.
But he says aggressive action had to be taken. Without it, Alaska would be in difficult financial straits.
"We would have gone through our savings this year. We'd have no savings left and we'd be staring at some pretty stiff, draconian taxes," said Dunleavy.
Recall supporters gathered more than 49,000 signatures but state officials rejected the premise for it. That ruling is now being challenged in court.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Gov. Dunleavy's reaction to the recall and his analysis of why cutting spending draws such fierce opposition in both parties - whether in Alaska or in Washington.NoAttorney: Judge Forced Jury to Side with Planned Parenthoodhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/staver_6However, it's the Center for Medical Progress facing civil and criminal charges for exposing Planned Parenthood's activities. The jury ordered CMP to pay Planned Parenthood more than $2 million in compensation and punitive damages. The verdict is being appealed at the same time both sides are preparing for the criminal trial of Daleiden and Merritt.

Merritt is represented by Liberty Counsel. Chairman Mathew Staver says he is not at all surprised by Friday's verdict one he saw the jury instructions from Judge William Orrick.

Listen to the podcast to hear why Staver believes the judge left no other option for the jury but to punish CMP and why he is appalled that Orrick did not recuse himself from the case. Staver also explains the legal road ahead and what he believes the consequences will be for free speech and a free press if Planned Parenthood ultimately wins these cases.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20103873Mon, 18 Nov 2019 21:56:47 +0000Radio AmericaOn Friday, a federal jury in California ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood and against David Daleiden, Sandra Merritt and the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) in a civil case stemming from the group's 2015 undercover videos depicting Planned...However, it's the Center for Medical Progress facing civil and criminal charges for exposing Planned Parenthood's activities. The jury ordered CMP to pay Planned Parenthood more than $2 million in compensation and punitive damages. The verdict is being appealed at the same time both sides are preparing for the criminal trial of Daleiden and Merritt.

Merritt is represented by Liberty Counsel. Chairman Mathew Staver says he is not at all surprised by Friday's verdict one he saw the jury instructions from Judge William Orrick.

Listen to the podcast to hear why Staver believes the judge left no other option for the jury but to punish CMP and why he is appalled that Orrick did not recuse himself from the case. Staver also explains the legal road ahead and what he believes the consequences will be for free speech and a free press if Planned Parenthood ultimately wins these cases.]]>595news,abortion,parenthood,orrick,merritt,planned,daleidencleanfullRadio AmericaOn Friday, a federal jury in California ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood and against David Daleiden, Sandra Merritt and the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) in a civil case stemming from the group's 2015 undercover videos depicting Planned Parenthood officials and others casually discussing the crushing of unborn babies and the selling of fetal body parts for profit.
However, it's the Center for Medical Progress facing civil and criminal charges for exposing Planned Parenthood's activities. The jury ordered CMP to pay Planned Parenthood more than $2 million in compensation and punitive damages. The verdict is being appealed at the same time both sides are preparing for the criminal trial of Daleiden and Merritt.
Merritt is represented by Liberty Counsel. Chairman Mathew Staver says he is not at all surprised by Friday's verdict one he saw the jury instructions from Judge William Orrick.
Listen to the podcast to hear why Staver believes the judge left no other option for the jury but to punish CMP and why he is appalled that Orrick did not recuse himself from the case. Staver also explains the legal road ahead and what he believes the consequences will be for free speech and a free press if Planned Parenthood ultimately wins these cases.NoGas Price Hikes Fuel Massive Protests Against Iranian Regimehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/alireza_2Iran is already cracking down violently on the protests. At least 200 are dead and the government admits to arresting 1,000 others. On Saturday, the government also cut off internet access for the Iranian people.

Massive protests in Iran are not new. We saw the Green Revolution a decade ago in response to fraudulent elections. Huge demonstrations also erupted nearly two years ago, spurred by the public's increasing frustration with a government increasingly seen as corrupt and using the money it does have for priorities that have nothing to do with the good of the people.

But will these protests have a different outcome? What is needed to force the ayatollahs and the political leaders to make significant change or relinquish power? What role do the United States and the United Nations need to play? And can Iranian demonstrators count on the UN to put pressure on Iranian leaders?

We discuss this and much more with Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20102063Mon, 18 Nov 2019 20:20:44 +0000Radio AmericaOn Friday, the Iranian regime announced gasoline prices would jump 50 percent, and in some cases 300 percent, a decree that immediately sent protesters flooding the streets in more than 100 cities across the country.
Iran is already cracking down...Iran is already cracking down violently on the protests. At least 200 are dead and the government admits to arresting 1,000 others. On Saturday, the government also cut off internet access for the Iranian people.

Massive protests in Iran are not new. We saw the Green Revolution a decade ago in response to fraudulent elections. Huge demonstrations also erupted nearly two years ago, spurred by the public's increasing frustration with a government increasingly seen as corrupt and using the money it does have for priorities that have nothing to do with the good of the people.

But will these protests have a different outcome? What is needed to force the ayatollahs and the political leaders to make significant change or relinquish power? What role do the United States and the United Nations need to play? And can Iranian demonstrators count on the UN to put pressure on Iranian leaders?

We discuss this and much more with Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.]]>915news,protests,iran,gasoline,rouhani,mek,khameineicleanfullRadio AmericaOn Friday, the Iranian regime announced gasoline prices would jump 50 percent, and in some cases 300 percent, a decree that immediately sent protesters flooding the streets in more than 100 cities across the country.
Iran is already cracking down violently on the protests. At least 200 are dead and the government admits to arresting 1,000 others. On Saturday, the government also cut off internet access for the Iranian people.
Massive protests in Iran are not new. We saw the Green Revolution a decade ago in response to fraudulent elections. Huge demonstrations also erupted nearly two years ago, spurred by the public's increasing frustration with a government increasingly seen as corrupt and using the money it does have for priorities that have nothing to do with the good of the people.
But will these protests have a different outcome? What is needed to force the ayatollahs and the political leaders to make significant change or relinquish power? What role do the United States and the United Nations need to play? And can Iranian demonstrators count on the UN to put pressure on Iranian leaders?
We discuss this and much more with Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.NoSanford Ends Campaign, Fight for Fiscal Sanity Continueshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/sanford_1Sanford challenged President Trump in the GOP presidential primary knowing full well his odds of winning were very low. But he launched the bid anyway, seeing it as an opportunity to highlight the fiscal cliff our nation seems determined to fly off of.

So why is Sanford ending the campaign?

"All the oxygen was being sucked out of the room by impeachment, said Sanford, in an interview Radio America's Greg Corombos. "I'm not into wasting my time or anybody else's. It was a long shot."

But Sanford still plans to play a leading role in getting America to pay attention to the nation's debt and spending problems. It comes at a time when the U.S. is running deficits nearing a trillion dollars under a Republican president. Most Democrats running for president would greatly expand the role of government and the amount of money to be spent.

And don't even get him started on plans for government-run health care.

"It's financial insanity. This is why I thought it was so important to try to raise my hand and say, 'I can't do this. I know I'm not going to become president but can we at least have a conversation about the fact that we're literally walking off the plank financially?'" said Sanford.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Sanford explain what awaits younger generations if Washington doesn't chart a different course, what approach is doable and would actually work, and what it will take for lawmakers to take the tough votes to rein in spending.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20055608Fri, 15 Nov 2019 22:28:43 +0000Radio AmericaFormer South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford ended his Republican presidential bid this week but he is more determined than ever to warn the nation of impending financial disaster.
Sanford challenged President Trump in the GOP presidential primary knowing...Sanford challenged President Trump in the GOP presidential primary knowing full well his odds of winning were very low. But he launched the bid anyway, seeing it as an opportunity to highlight the fiscal cliff our nation seems determined to fly off of.

So why is Sanford ending the campaign?

"All the oxygen was being sucked out of the room by impeachment, said Sanford, in an interview Radio America's Greg Corombos. "I'm not into wasting my time or anybody else's. It was a long shot."

But Sanford still plans to play a leading role in getting America to pay attention to the nation's debt and spending problems. It comes at a time when the U.S. is running deficits nearing a trillion dollars under a Republican president. Most Democrats running for president would greatly expand the role of government and the amount of money to be spent.

And don't even get him started on plans for government-run health care.

"It's financial insanity. This is why I thought it was so important to try to raise my hand and say, 'I can't do this. I know I'm not going to become president but can we at least have a conversation about the fact that we're literally walking off the plank financially?'" said Sanford.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Sanford explain what awaits younger generations if Washington doesn't chart a different course, what approach is doable and would actually work, and what it will take for lawmakers to take the tough votes to rein in spending.]]>932news,trump,democrats,debt,spending,sanford,deficitscleanfullRadio AmericaFormer South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford ended his Republican presidential bid this week but he is more determined than ever to warn the nation of impending financial disaster.
Sanford challenged President Trump in the GOP presidential primary knowing full well his odds of winning were very low. But he launched the bid anyway, seeing it as an opportunity to highlight the fiscal cliff our nation seems determined to fly off of.
So why is Sanford ending the campaign?
"All the oxygen was being sucked out of the room by impeachment, said Sanford, in an interview Radio America's Greg Corombos. "I'm not into wasting my time or anybody else's. It was a long shot."
But Sanford still plans to play a leading role in getting America to pay attention to the nation's debt and spending problems. It comes at a time when the U.S. is running deficits nearing a trillion dollars under a Republican president. Most Democrats running for president would greatly expand the role of government and the amount of money to be spent.
And don't even get him started on plans for government-run health care.
"It's financial insanity. This is why I thought it was so important to try to raise my hand and say, 'I can't do this. I know I'm not going to become president but can we at least have a conversation about the fact that we're literally walking off the plank financially?'" said Sanford.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Sanford explain what awaits younger generations if Washington doesn't chart a different course, what approach is doable and would actually work, and what it will take for lawmakers to take the tough votes to rein in spending.NoChina vs. Hong Kong: 'This Could Go on for A Very Long Time'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/chang_6Just this week, a police officer shot an unarmed demonstrator at close range. There is also much greater tension at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, as students fortify the campus and prepare to defend their positions.

Protesters insist they aren't going anywhere until their five demands for freedom are met. China says it will not allow it's control over Hong Kong to be weakened.

Why are things continuing to escalate? How will this impasse ever be resolved? And what should the U.S. be doing to side with freedom?

We cover those questions and much more as Greg Corombos visits with East Asia expert Gordon Chang, author of "The Coming Collapse of China."]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20054728Fri, 15 Nov 2019 21:44:41 +0000Radio AmericaWhile impeachment politics and other headlines often overshadow it, the pro-freedom demonstrations and the increasingly violent crackdowns by the Hong Kong police continue.
Just this week, a police officer shot an unarmed demonstrator at close...Just this week, a police officer shot an unarmed demonstrator at close range. There is also much greater tension at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, as students fortify the campus and prepare to defend their positions.

Protesters insist they aren't going anywhere until their five demands for freedom are met. China says it will not allow it's control over Hong Kong to be weakened.

Why are things continuing to escalate? How will this impasse ever be resolved? And what should the U.S. be doing to side with freedom?

We cover those questions and much more as Greg Corombos visits with East Asia expert Gordon Chang, author of "The Coming Collapse of China."]]>526news,trump,china,protesters,kong,hong,cuhkcleanfullRadio AmericaWhile impeachment politics and other headlines often overshadow it, the pro-freedom demonstrations and the increasingly violent crackdowns by the Hong Kong police continue.
Just this week, a police officer shot an unarmed demonstrator at close range. There is also much greater tension at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, as students fortify the campus and prepare to defend their positions.
Protesters insist they aren't going anywhere until their five demands for freedom are met. China says it will not allow it's control over Hong Kong to be weakened.
Why are things continuing to escalate? How will this impasse ever be resolved? And what should the U.S. be doing to side with freedom?
We cover those questions and much more as Greg Corombos visits with East Asia expert Gordon Chang, author of "The Coming Collapse of China."NoImmigration: DACA in Court, Dems Getting More Radicalhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/krikorianImmigration was also front and center at the Supreme Court Tuesday, as justices heard arguments concerning President Trump's decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, better known as DACA.

DACA was created by the Obama administration in 2012 to grant legal status and work permits to people brought to the U.S. illegally when they were small children. Roughly 700,000 people enrolled in the program.

"This case is not about whether DACA is a good idea or not or whether it will cause people hardship to have their work permits not be renewed," said Krikorian. "This is purely about whether a president has the authority to end a program that a previous president made up."

Krikorian says that question is a constitutional no-brainer in Trump's favor and he is appalled that the matter even reached the Supreme Court.

Krikorian, who is firmly in favor of lowering the number of legal immigrants, believes keeping DACA could be useful if the accompanying legislation limits practices such as chain migration.

However, he places the odds at any significant immigration reform in the next year at zero. Krikorian says election year politics and the leftward lurch of many Democrats in this debate make common ground hard to find.

Recently, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, said if elected he would move to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Patrol. He would also decriminalize illegal immigration, making it a civil offense. In addition, Sanders would suspend deportations and allow 50,000 climate migrants into the U.S. in his first year in office.

Krikorian says those are quickly becoming the standard positions inside the Democratic Party.

"It has become truly radicalized on immigration and I don't use that word lightly," said Krikorian. "That fringe perspective on immigration, that immigration control of any kind is illegitimate, that borders are illegitimate, that's not fringe anymore in the Democratic Party. That is the basic mainstream position of Democratic elected officials."

Listen to the full podcast to hear Krikorian's full breakdown of the Supreme Court arguments and the dwindling prospects for any constructive immigration reform.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19996547Tue, 12 Nov 2019 21:42:10 +0000Radio AmericaImmigration remains a highly volatile issue and the odds of finding common ground on any meaningful reform seems less and less likely as the nation heads into a presidential election year.
Immigration was also front and center at the Supreme Court...Immigration was also front and center at the Supreme Court Tuesday, as justices heard arguments concerning President Trump's decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, better known as DACA.

DACA was created by the Obama administration in 2012 to grant legal status and work permits to people brought to the U.S. illegally when they were small children. Roughly 700,000 people enrolled in the program.

"This case is not about whether DACA is a good idea or not or whether it will cause people hardship to have their work permits not be renewed," said Krikorian. "This is purely about whether a president has the authority to end a program that a previous president made up."

Krikorian says that question is a constitutional no-brainer in Trump's favor and he is appalled that the matter even reached the Supreme Court.

Krikorian, who is firmly in favor of lowering the number of legal immigrants, believes keeping DACA could be useful if the accompanying legislation limits practices such as chain migration.

However, he places the odds at any significant immigration reform in the next year at zero. Krikorian says election year politics and the leftward lurch of many Democrats in this debate make common ground hard to find.

Recently, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, said if elected he would move to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Patrol. He would also decriminalize illegal immigration, making it a civil offense. In addition, Sanders would suspend deportations and allow 50,000 climate migrants into the U.S. in his first year in office.

Krikorian says those are quickly becoming the standard positions inside the Democratic Party.

"It has become truly radicalized on immigration and I don't use that word lightly," said Krikorian. "That fringe perspective on immigration, that immigration control of any kind is illegitimate, that borders are illegitimate, that's not fringe anymore in the Democratic Party. That is the basic mainstream position of Democratic elected officials."

Listen to the full podcast to hear Krikorian's full breakdown of the Supreme Court arguments and the dwindling prospects for any constructive immigration reform.]]>668trump,immigration,democrats,sanders,2020,scotus,dacacleanfullRadio AmericaImmigration remains a highly volatile issue and the odds of finding common ground on any meaningful reform seems less and less likely as the nation heads into a presidential election year.
Immigration was also front and center at the Supreme Court Tuesday, as justices heard arguments concerning President Trump's decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, better known as DACA.
DACA was created by the Obama administration in 2012 to grant legal status and work permits to people brought to the U.S. illegally when they were small children. Roughly 700,000 people enrolled in the program.
But Center for Immigration Studies Executive Director Mark Krikorian says Americans need to understand what the court is actually deciding here.
"This case is not about whether DACA is a good idea or not or whether it will cause people hardship to have their work permits not be renewed," said Krikorian. "This is purely about whether a president has the authority to end a program that a previous president made up."
Krikorian says that question is a constitutional no-brainer in Trump's favor and he is appalled that the matter even reached the Supreme Court.
Krikorian, who is firmly in favor of lowering the number of legal immigrants, believes keeping DACA could be useful if the accompanying legislation limits practices such as chain migration.
However, he places the odds at any significant immigration reform in the next year at zero. Krikorian says election year politics and the leftward lurch of many Democrats in this debate make common ground hard to find.
Recently, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, said if elected he would move to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Patrol. He would also decriminalize illegal immigration, making it a civil offense. In addition, Sanders would suspend deportations and allow 50,000 climate migrants into the U.S. in his first year in office.
Krikorian says those are quickly becoming the standard positions inside the Democratic Party.
"It has become truly radicalized on immigration and I don't use that word lightly," said Krikorian. "That fringe perspective on immigration, that immigration control of any kind is illegitimate, that borders are illegitimate, that's not fringe anymore in the Democratic Party. That is the basic mainstream position of Democratic elected officials."
Listen to the full podcast to hear Krikorian's full breakdown of the Supreme Court arguments and the dwindling prospects for any constructive immigration reform.NoCost of Prescription Drugs: Price vs. Progresshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/jacobs-drug-billPharmaceutical companies are pushing back, stressing that researching and developing successful new medicines costs billions of dollars, and the unsuccessful efforts cost a lot of money too. They say prescription drug prices cannot be artificially lowered or else efforts to bring new and better treatments to market will be derailed.

How exactly would the legislation from Democrats work? Why are prescription drug prices so much lower in other countries than they are in the U.S.? What can be done to help patients afford the drugs they need right now without stalling progress on future treatments?

We tackle all of these questions and more with Chris Jacobs, CEO of the Juniper Research Group and author of "The Case Against Single-Payer."]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19978291Mon, 11 Nov 2019 21:25:01 +0000Radio AmericaDemocrats in Congress are pushing legislation to force pharmaceuticals to lower the cost of prescription drugs. The goal is to ensure that all Americans can afford the medicines they need to preserve their health.
Pharmaceutical companies are...Pharmaceutical companies are pushing back, stressing that researching and developing successful new medicines costs billions of dollars, and the unsuccessful efforts cost a lot of money too. They say prescription drug prices cannot be artificially lowered or else efforts to bring new and better treatments to market will be derailed.

How exactly would the legislation from Democrats work? Why are prescription drug prices so much lower in other countries than they are in the U.S.? What can be done to help patients afford the drugs they need right now without stalling progress on future treatments?

We tackle all of these questions and more with Chris Jacobs, CEO of the Juniper Research Group and author of "The Case Against Single-Payer."]]>366news,drugs,prescription,development,treatments,costscleanfullRadio AmericaDemocrats in Congress are pushing legislation to force pharmaceuticals to lower the cost of prescription drugs. The goal is to ensure that all Americans can afford the medicines they need to preserve their health.
Pharmaceutical companies are pushing back, stressing that researching and developing successful new medicines costs billions of dollars, and the unsuccessful efforts cost a lot of money too. They say prescription drug prices cannot be artificially lowered or else efforts to bring new and better treatments to market will be derailed.
How exactly would the legislation from Democrats work? Why are prescription drug prices so much lower in other countries than they are in the U.S.? What can be done to help patients afford the drugs they need right now without stalling progress on future treatments?
We tackle all of these questions and more with Chris Jacobs, CEO of the Juniper Research Group and author of "The Case Against Single-Payer."NoVirginia Dems Ready Major Gun Control Efforthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hammond_4This past summer, Northam called a special session to address gun legislation. The Republican majority promptly adjourned the session. Now with control of both the State Senate and the House of Delegates, Northam is making his agenda known.

According to the Washington Post, Northam held a cabinet meeting Wednesday and publicly laid out his gun control agenda. He “mentioned universal background checks, banning the sale of [semi-automatic firearms] and high-capacity magazines, restoring the law that limits purchases to one gun a month, and a red flag law that would empower a court to temporarily remove a gun from a person deemed to be a risk to himself or others.”

Northam also admitted he was seriously examining how to confiscate firearms already legally owned by Virginians but would be banned under his proposed legislation.

But what exactly does Northam mean by an "assault weapon." Gun Owners of America Legislative Counsel Mike Hammond says Northam appears to have a broad swath of weapons in mind for his ban.

"As far as I can tell, it's basically all semi-automatics that have one or no features that make them look like actual automatic firearms. The term assault weapon is sort of a fraudulent term invented by the left in order to make regular rifles and handguns more dangerous or more exceptional than they in fact are," said Hammond.

And what does Hammond think about Northam's confiscation plans?

"Oh, I hope he goes that route because, as (former Democratic presidential candidate) Beto O'Rourke found out, when you talk about raiding someone's house in the middle of the night through these red flag gun confiscation laws and seizing their semi-automatic rifles, then at that point I think firearms owners in Virginia will finally wake up and there will be a red wave during the next gubernatorial election," said Hammond.

Listen to the full podcast as Hammond explains why any component of Northam's agenda would be an unacceptable infringement on the Second Amendment and why he thinks it's possible to defeat the gun control agenda in the Virginia legislature even with Democrats in charge.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19933603Fri, 08 Nov 2019 22:35:22 +0000Radio AmericaOn Tuesday, Democrats won the majority in both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly. Come January, gun control will be at the top of the agenda for Gov. Ralph Northam and his allies in the legislature.
This past summer, Northam called a special...This past summer, Northam called a special session to address gun legislation. The Republican majority promptly adjourned the session. Now with control of both the State Senate and the House of Delegates, Northam is making his agenda known.

According to the Washington Post, Northam held a cabinet meeting Wednesday and publicly laid out his gun control agenda. He “mentioned universal background checks, banning the sale of [semi-automatic firearms] and high-capacity magazines, restoring the law that limits purchases to one gun a month, and a red flag law that would empower a court to temporarily remove a gun from a person deemed to be a risk to himself or others.”

Northam also admitted he was seriously examining how to confiscate firearms already legally owned by Virginians but would be banned under his proposed legislation.

But what exactly does Northam mean by an "assault weapon." Gun Owners of America Legislative Counsel Mike Hammond says Northam appears to have a broad swath of weapons in mind for his ban.

"As far as I can tell, it's basically all semi-automatics that have one or no features that make them look like actual automatic firearms. The term assault weapon is sort of a fraudulent term invented by the left in order to make regular rifles and handguns more dangerous or more exceptional than they in fact are," said Hammond.

And what does Hammond think about Northam's confiscation plans?

"Oh, I hope he goes that route because, as (former Democratic presidential candidate) Beto O'Rourke found out, when you talk about raiding someone's house in the middle of the night through these red flag gun confiscation laws and seizing their semi-automatic rifles, then at that point I think firearms owners in Virginia will finally wake up and there will be a red wave during the next gubernatorial election," said Hammond.

Listen to the full podcast as Hammond explains why any component of Northam's agenda would be an unacceptable infringement on the Second Amendment and why he thinks it's possible to defeat the gun control agenda in the Virginia legislature even with Democrats in charge.]]>474news,guns,virginia,weapons,assault,confiscation,northamcleanfullRadio AmericaOn Tuesday, Democrats won the majority in both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly. Come January, gun control will be at the top of the agenda for Gov. Ralph Northam and his allies in the legislature.
This past summer, Northam called a special session to address gun legislation. The Republican majority promptly adjourned the session. Now with control of both the State Senate and the House of Delegates, Northam is making his agenda known.
According to the Washington Post, Northam held a cabinet meeting Wednesday and publicly laid out his gun control agenda. He “mentioned universal background checks, banning the sale of [semi-automatic firearms] and high-capacity magazines, restoring the law that limits purchases to one gun a month, and a red flag law that would empower a court to temporarily remove a gun from a person deemed to be a risk to himself or others.”
Northam also admitted he was seriously examining how to confiscate firearms already legally owned by Virginians but would be banned under his proposed legislation.
But what exactly does Northam mean by an "assault weapon." Gun Owners of America Legislative Counsel Mike Hammond says Northam appears to have a broad swath of weapons in mind for his ban.
"As far as I can tell, it's basically all semi-automatics that have one or no features that make them look like actual automatic firearms. The term assault weapon is sort of a fraudulent term invented by the left in order to make regular rifles and handguns more dangerous or more exceptional than they in fact are," said Hammond.
And what does Hammond think about Northam's confiscation plans?
"Oh, I hope he goes that route because, as (former Democratic presidential candidate) Beto O'Rourke found out, when you talk about raiding someone's house in the middle of the night through these red flag gun confiscation laws and seizing their semi-automatic rifles, then at that point I think firearms owners in Virginia will finally wake up and there will be a red wave during the next gubernatorial election," said Hammond.
Listen to the full podcast as Hammond explains why any component of Northam's agenda would be an unacceptable infringement on the Second Amendment and why he thinks it's possible to defeat the gun control agenda in the Virginia legislature even with Democrats in charge.NoJudge Strikes Down Conscience Protections for Health Providershttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/staver_5“Health care is a basic right that should never be subject to political games," said New York Attorney General Tish James, who brought the case, according to Politico. "Once again, the courts have blocked the Trump Administration from implementing a discriminatory rule that would only hurt Americans."

The rule administered through the Department of Health and Human Services threatened to curtail federal funding for institutions that refused to allow providers to opt out of such procedures on grounds of their conscience. Judge Paul Engelmayer agreed with state and local officials and groups like Planned Parenthood.

But defenders of free religious expression are furious.

"This particular ruling is absolutely outrageous," said Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver. "They're not going to lose any federal funding as long as they simply do what they're supposed to and that is to honor the constitutional protection to free exercise of religion."

Listen to the full podcast to hear Staver explain that the Trump administration's rule is not some radical departure from precedent but is actually restoring a long-held precedent reversed during the Obama administration. He also shares how he thinks this issue will be resolved on appeal.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19913760Thu, 07 Nov 2019 22:09:45 +0000Radio AmericaThis week, a federal district court judge in New York struck down conscience protections for health care providers whose sincere religious beliefs convict them not to participate in abortion, gender reassignment procedures, or dispense birth control....“Health care is a basic right that should never be subject to political games," said New York Attorney General Tish James, who brought the case, according to Politico. "Once again, the courts have blocked the Trump Administration from implementing a discriminatory rule that would only hurt Americans."

The rule administered through the Department of Health and Human Services threatened to curtail federal funding for institutions that refused to allow providers to opt out of such procedures on grounds of their conscience. Judge Paul Engelmayer agreed with state and local officials and groups like Planned Parenthood.

But defenders of free religious expression are furious.

"This particular ruling is absolutely outrageous," said Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver. "They're not going to lose any federal funding as long as they simply do what they're supposed to and that is to honor the constitutional protection to free exercise of religion."

Listen to the full podcast to hear Staver explain that the Trump administration's rule is not some radical departure from precedent but is actually restoring a long-held precedent reversed during the Obama administration. He also shares how he thinks this issue will be resolved on appeal.]]>563news,lgbt,abortion,conscience,hhscleanfullRadio AmericaThis week, a federal district court judge in New York struck down conscience protections for health care providers whose sincere religious beliefs convict them not to participate in abortion, gender reassignment procedures, or dispense birth control.
“Health care is a basic right that should never be subject to political games," said New York Attorney General Tish James, who brought the case, according to Politico. "Once again, the courts have blocked the Trump Administration from implementing a discriminatory rule that would only hurt Americans."
The rule administered through the Department of Health and Human Services threatened to curtail federal funding for institutions that refused to allow providers to opt out of such procedures on grounds of their conscience. Judge Paul Engelmayer agreed with state and local officials and groups like Planned Parenthood.
But defenders of free religious expression are furious.
"This particular ruling is absolutely outrageous," said Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver. "They're not going to lose any federal funding as long as they simply do what they're supposed to and that is to honor the constitutional protection to free exercise of religion."
Listen to the full podcast to hear Staver explain that the Trump administration's rule is not some radical departure from precedent but is actually restoring a long-held precedent reversed during the Obama administration. He also shares how he thinks this issue will be resolved on appeal.NoWhy Warren's Math Won't Workhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/jacobs-warrenWarren says the price tag is roughly $52 trillion over ten years, yet insists she can pay for it by taxing billionaires, cracking down on tax cheats, and streamlining administrative costs of the program.

Chris Jacobs is CEO of the Juniper Research Group and author of "The Case Against Single Payer." He tells me why all three of Warren's ideas fall far short of meeting the expected costs, why two of her three ideas are contradictions of one another, and why the math is laughably wrong on the tax enforcement plan. He will also explain what kind of tax increases will really be needed to pay for Warren's health plans and why he suspects she won't admit that she'll have to tax everyone.

Listen to the full podcast with Chris Jacobs.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19895876Wed, 06 Nov 2019 22:22:10 +0000Radio AmericaAfter taking heat from her Democratic rivals for months, Sen. Elizabeth Warren released her plan for covering the cost of government-sponsored health care for all Americans.
Warren says the price tag is roughly $52 trillion over ten years, yet...Warren says the price tag is roughly $52 trillion over ten years, yet insists she can pay for it by taxing billionaires, cracking down on tax cheats, and streamlining administrative costs of the program.

Chris Jacobs is CEO of the Juniper Research Group and author of "The Case Against Single Payer." He tells me why all three of Warren's ideas fall far short of meeting the expected costs, why two of her three ideas are contradictions of one another, and why the math is laughably wrong on the tax enforcement plan. He will also explain what kind of tax increases will really be needed to pay for Warren's health plans and why he suspects she won't admit that she'll have to tax everyone.

Listen to the full podcast with Chris Jacobs.]]>630news,health,taxes,medicare,revenue,warren,costscleanfullRadio AmericaAfter taking heat from her Democratic rivals for months, Sen. Elizabeth Warren released her plan for covering the cost of government-sponsored health care for all Americans.
Warren says the price tag is roughly $52 trillion over ten years, yet insists she can pay for it by taxing billionaires, cracking down on tax cheats, and streamlining administrative costs of the program.
Chris Jacobs is CEO of the Juniper Research Group and author of "The Case Against Single Payer." He tells me why all three of Warren's ideas fall far short of meeting the expected costs, why two of her three ideas are contradictions of one another, and why the math is laughably wrong on the tax enforcement plan. He will also explain what kind of tax increases will really be needed to pay for Warren's health plans and why he suspects she won't admit that she'll have to tax everyone.
Listen to the full podcast with Chris Jacobs.NoCaptivity, Brutality, and Freedom, Iran Hostage Crisis Part 3https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hermening-3In the final installment of his three-part interview with Greg Corombos, Hermening details the anguish inflicted upon the Americans by their Iranian captors, the surprise visitor he received while held captive, and how freedom felt after losing it for more than a year.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19793501Thu, 31 Oct 2019 21:11:22 +0000Radio AmericaThis coming Monday marks the start of a very dark chapter in American history. On November 4, 1979, Iranians took over the U.S. embassy in Iran. Then a 20-year-old U.S. Marine stationed at the embassy, Kevin Hermening became the youngest American...In the final installment of his three-part interview with Greg Corombos, Hermening details the anguish inflicted upon the Americans by their Iranian captors, the surprise visitor he received while held captive, and how freedom felt after losing it for more than a year.]]>981news,crisis,iran,hostagecleanfullRadio AmericaThis coming Monday marks the start of a very dark chapter in American history. On November 4, 1979, Iranians took over the U.S. embassy in Iran. Then a 20-year-old U.S. Marine stationed at the embassy, Kevin Hermening became the youngest American hostage held captive for the next 444 days.
In the final installment of his three-part interview with Greg Corombos, Hermening details the anguish inflicted upon the Americans by their Iranian captors, the surprise visitor he received while held captive, and how freedom felt after losing it for more than a year.NoThe Embassy Is Seized, Iran Hostage Crisis Part 2https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hermening-2In the second installment of his three-part interview with Greg Corombos, Hermening walks us moment by moment as the Americans lost control of the embassy and were taken captive.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19793473Thu, 31 Oct 2019 21:06:59 +0000Radio AmericaThis coming Monday marks the start of a very dark chapter in American history. On November 4, 1979, Iranians took over the U.S. embassy in Iran. Then a 20-year-old U.S. Marine stationed at the embassy, Kevin Hermening became the youngest American...In the second installment of his three-part interview with Greg Corombos, Hermening walks us moment by moment as the Americans lost control of the embassy and were taken captive.]]>416news,crisis,iran,hostagecleanfullRadio AmericaThis coming Monday marks the start of a very dark chapter in American history. On November 4, 1979, Iranians took over the U.S. embassy in Iran. Then a 20-year-old U.S. Marine stationed at the embassy, Kevin Hermening became the youngest American hostage held captive for the next 444 days.
In the second installment of his three-part interview with Greg Corombos, Hermening walks us moment by moment as the Americans lost control of the embassy and were taken captive.NoTrouble Is Coming, Iran Hostage Crisis Part 1https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hermening-1In the first installment of his three-part interview with Greg Corombos, Hermening details his military journey to Iran and how things there were obviously deteriorating in the days leading up to the attack on the embassy.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19793346Thu, 31 Oct 2019 21:02:59 +0000Radio AmericaThis coming Monday marks the start of a very dark chapter in American history. On November 4, 1979, Iranians took over the U.S. embassy in Iran. Then a 20-year-old U.S. Marine stationed at the embassy, Kevin Hermening became the youngest American...In the first installment of his three-part interview with Greg Corombos, Hermening details his military journey to Iran and how things there were obviously deteriorating in the days leading up to the attack on the embassy.]]>486news,crisis,iran,hostage,embassycleanfullRadio AmericaThis coming Monday marks the start of a very dark chapter in American history. On November 4, 1979, Iranians took over the U.S. embassy in Iran. Then a 20-year-old U.S. Marine stationed at the embassy, Kevin Hermening became the youngest American hostage held captive for the next 444 days.
In the first installment of his three-part interview with Greg Corombos, Hermening details his military journey to Iran and how things there were obviously deteriorating in the days leading up to the attack on the embassy.NoWhat Medicare for All Will Really Cost Youhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/sepp_9Projections suggest such a plan would cost $32 trillion over the first ten years. Warren plans to pay for that with a two percent wealth tax on the super rich. Sanders admits he would raise taxes on the upper class and the middle class, but both insist their plans will be a net positive financially for American families.

But is that true? Would the tax plans raise even close to enough revenue to pay for this new entitlement? National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp says they won't and so does the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Budget.

The CFRB says to make ends meet, lawmakers would need to enact a 42 value-added tax on consumers, a 32 percent payroll tax split between employers and employees, a 25 percent income tax surcharge on all Americans, or require everyone to pay roughly $7,500 to buy into the federal health care program.

In this podcast, Sepp details the devastating effect such tax increases would have on American families and the U.S. economy. He also addresses the possibility that the government will just let our debt pile up even higher and faster.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19774071Wed, 30 Oct 2019 20:33:38 +0000Radio AmericaPresidential candidates like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are vowing to abolish private health insurance if elected president and have all Americans get their coverage through the federal government.
Projections suggest such a plan would cost...Projections suggest such a plan would cost $32 trillion over the first ten years. Warren plans to pay for that with a two percent wealth tax on the super rich. Sanders admits he would raise taxes on the upper class and the middle class, but both insist their plans will be a net positive financially for American families.

But is that true? Would the tax plans raise even close to enough revenue to pay for this new entitlement? National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp says they won't and so does the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Budget.

The CFRB says to make ends meet, lawmakers would need to enact a 42 value-added tax on consumers, a 32 percent payroll tax split between employers and employees, a 25 percent income tax surcharge on all Americans, or require everyone to pay roughly $7,500 to buy into the federal health care program.

In this podcast, Sepp details the devastating effect such tax increases would have on American families and the U.S. economy. He also addresses the possibility that the government will just let our debt pile up even higher and faster.]]>723news,taxes,sanders,warren,vat,single-payercleanfullRadio AmericaPresidential candidates like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are vowing to abolish private health insurance if elected president and have all Americans get their coverage through the federal government.
Projections suggest such a plan would cost $32 trillion over the first ten years. Warren plans to pay for that with a two percent wealth tax on the super rich. Sanders admits he would raise taxes on the upper class and the middle class, but both insist their plans will be a net positive financially for American families.
But is that true? Would the tax plans raise even close to enough revenue to pay for this new entitlement? National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp says they won't and so does the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Budget.
The CFRB says to make ends meet, lawmakers would need to enact a 42 value-added tax on consumers, a 32 percent payroll tax split between employers and employees, a 25 percent income tax surcharge on all Americans, or require everyone to pay roughly $7,500 to buy into the federal health care program.
In this podcast, Sepp details the devastating effect such tax increases would have on American families and the U.S. economy. He also addresses the possibility that the government will just let our debt pile up even higher and faster.NoHow Special Forces Prepare and Execute Missionshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/boykinBut how do special forces prepare for missions like this and how are they trained to respond to the enemy's actions to successfully execute the mission?

Retired U.S. Army Lt. General Jerry Boykin served 36 years in uniform, much of it in special forces. He was an original member of Delta Force and at one time commanded all Green Berets.

Gen. Boykin walks us through the planning, rehearsing, and executing of missions like the one that took out Baghdadi. He also cuts through the political bluster to explain when presidents are required to inform key members of Congress about a mission and when they are not.

Listen here for the full podcast.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19754317Tue, 29 Oct 2019 18:55:58 +0000Radio AmericaThis past weekend, U.S. forces successfully killed ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the terrorist figure responsible for inspiring some of the most grisly murders and rapes in recent times. The surgical strike resulted in no U.S. deaths or injuries...But how do special forces prepare for missions like this and how are they trained to respond to the enemy's actions to successfully execute the mission?

Retired U.S. Army Lt. General Jerry Boykin served 36 years in uniform, much of it in special forces. He was an original member of Delta Force and at one time commanded all Green Berets.

Gen. Boykin walks us through the planning, rehearsing, and executing of missions like the one that took out Baghdadi. He also cuts through the political bluster to explain when presidents are required to inform key members of Congress about a mission and when they are not.

Listen here for the full podcast.]]>724news,special,military,trump,forces,isis,baghdadicleanfullRadio AmericaThis past weekend, U.S. forces successfully killed ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the terrorist figure responsible for inspiring some of the most grisly murders and rapes in recent times. The surgical strike resulted in no U.S. deaths or injuries and even the wounded dog is on the road to recovery.
But how do special forces prepare for missions like this and how are they trained to respond to the enemy's actions to successfully execute the mission?
Retired U.S. Army Lt. General Jerry Boykin served 36 years in uniform, much of it in special forces. He was an original member of Delta Force and at one time commanded all Green Berets.
Gen. Boykin walks us through the planning, rehearsing, and executing of missions like the one that took out Baghdadi. He also cuts through the political bluster to explain when presidents are required to inform key members of Congress about a mission and when they are not.
Listen here for the full podcast.NoWhat Americans Don't Know about Medicare for Allhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/turner_8After all these years, why is there such a disconnect between what Americans think they support and what they actually support once they know the facts?

In this podcast, we ask Galen Institute Pres. Grace-Marie Turner about this discrepancy and what she thinks about new reform ideas from the House Republican Study Committee.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19655472Wed, 23 Oct 2019 20:36:42 +0000Radio AmericaA new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation shows 51 percent of American adults favor a Medicare for All approach to health care. But 58 percent also oppose abolishing private insurance and even more oppose paying more in taxes to pay for...After all these years, why is there such a disconnect between what Americans think they support and what they actually support once they know the facts?

In this podcast, we ask Galen Institute Pres. Grace-Marie Turner about this discrepancy and what she thinks about new reform ideas from the House Republican Study Committee.]]>529news,health,medicare,republicans,democrats,polling,single-payercleanfullRadio AmericaA new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation shows 51 percent of American adults favor a Medicare for All approach to health care. But 58 percent also oppose abolishing private insurance and even more oppose paying more in taxes to pay for single-payer health care.
After all these years, why is there such a disconnect between what Americans think they support and what they actually support once they know the facts?
In this podcast, we ask Galen Institute Pres. Grace-Marie Turner about this discrepancy and what she thinks about new reform ideas from the House Republican Study Committee.NoWhy Health Care Is Broken and How to Fix Ithttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/makaryIn his new book, "The Price We Pay," Johns Hopkins University surgeon and Prof. Marty Makary details the epidemic of overtreating and overcharging patients.

In this podcast, Makary tells Greg Corombos why doctors often order treatment when none is actually needed. He also burrows down into why patients are stuck with astronomical medical bills without ever knowing the costs before treatment.

Makary explains why ideas like pointing patients towards healthier lifestyles, showing doctors how often they order treatment compared to their peers, and price transparency are among the keys to bringing competition and results back to the health care sector.

Listen to the full podcast here.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19618150Mon, 21 Oct 2019 21:06:19 +0000Radio AmericaPoliticians keep fighting over how to help Americans pay for their health care. But why is health care so expensive in the first place?
In his new book, "The Price We Pay," Johns Hopkins University surgeon and Prof. Marty Makary details the epidemic...In his new book, "The Price We Pay," Johns Hopkins University surgeon and Prof. Marty Makary details the epidemic of overtreating and overcharging patients.

In this podcast, Makary tells Greg Corombos why doctors often order treatment when none is actually needed. He also burrows down into why patients are stuck with astronomical medical bills without ever knowing the costs before treatment.

Makary explains why ideas like pointing patients towards healthier lifestyles, showing doctors how often they order treatment compared to their peers, and price transparency are among the keys to bringing competition and results back to the health care sector.

Listen to the full podcast here.]]>1098news,health,medicine,doctors,hospital,billing,makarycleanfullRadio AmericaPoliticians keep fighting over how to help Americans pay for their health care. But why is health care so expensive in the first place?
In his new book, "The Price We Pay," Johns Hopkins University surgeon and Prof. Marty Makary details the epidemic of overtreating and overcharging patients.
In this podcast, Makary tells Greg Corombos why doctors often order treatment when none is actually needed. He also burrows down into why patients are stuck with astronomical medical bills without ever knowing the costs before treatment.
Makary explains why ideas like pointing patients towards healthier lifestyles, showing doctors how often they order treatment compared to their peers, and price transparency are among the keys to bringing competition and results back to the health care sector.
Listen to the full podcast here.NoTrump's Turkey Deal: Success or Capitulation?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/berman_4But while Trump heaps praise on the deal and Turkish President Recep Erdogan, what does the deal actually accomplish? Does it bring at least a brief stretch of stability to the region or or is it a flimsy deal that really sells out the Kurds?

In this podcast, we discuss all these questions with American Foreign Policy Council Senior Vice President Ilan Berman. And we'll also ask why Trump is so effusive in his admiration for Erdogan and what impact this whole episode will have on U.S. relations with other allies.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19558887Thu, 17 Oct 2019 21:05:53 +0000Radio AmericaOn Thursday, Vice President Mike Pence announced a cease-fire agreement that will end Turkish aggression against the Kurds in northern Syria for at least five days as a stepping stone to long-term stability.
But while Trump heaps praise on the deal...But while Trump heaps praise on the deal and Turkish President Recep Erdogan, what does the deal actually accomplish? Does it bring at least a brief stretch of stability to the region or or is it a flimsy deal that really sells out the Kurds?

In this podcast, we discuss all these questions with American Foreign Policy Council Senior Vice President Ilan Berman. And we'll also ask why Trump is so effusive in his admiration for Erdogan and what impact this whole episode will have on U.S. relations with other allies.]]>499turkey,trump,pence,erdogan,kurdscleanfullRadio AmericaOn Thursday, Vice President Mike Pence announced a cease-fire agreement that will end Turkish aggression against the Kurds in northern Syria for at least five days as a stepping stone to long-term stability.
But while Trump heaps praise on the deal and Turkish President Recep Erdogan, what does the deal actually accomplish? Does it bring at least a brief stretch of stability to the region or or is it a flimsy deal that really sells out the Kurds?
In this podcast, we discuss all these questions with American Foreign Policy Council Senior Vice President Ilan Berman. And we'll also ask why Trump is so effusive in his admiration for Erdogan and what impact this whole episode will have on U.S. relations with other allies.NoDeMint Offers Conservative Ideas to Improve Americahttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/demint2He also walks us through a number of conservative policy ideas and innovations to improve our nation, including Education Savings Accounts and converting vehicles to run on natural gas.

Listen to the full podcast as DeMint also tells Greg Corombos why there isn't much appetite for policy innovation in Congress these days and how people can come together around possible policy solutions in an era when the partisan divide seems wider than ever.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19464892Fri, 11 Oct 2019 21:28:53 +0000Radio AmericaIn the second half of our interview with Conservative Partnership Institute Chairman Jim DeMint, the former U.S. senator and co-author of "Conservative: What to Keep," DeMint explains how conservatives want to help people who are struggling without...He also walks us through a number of conservative policy ideas and innovations to improve our nation, including Education Savings Accounts and converting vehicles to run on natural gas.

Listen to the full podcast as DeMint also tells Greg Corombos why there isn't much appetite for policy innovation in Congress these days and how people can come together around possible policy solutions in an era when the partisan divide seems wider than ever.]]>532news,education,energy,government,conservative,gas,dependence,demintcleanfullRadio AmericaIn the second half of our interview with Conservative Partnership Institute Chairman Jim DeMint, the former U.S. senator and co-author of "Conservative: What to Keep," DeMint explains how conservatives want to help people who are struggling without making them dependent upon government.
He also walks us through a number of conservative policy ideas and innovations to improve our nation, including Education Savings Accounts and converting vehicles to run on natural gas.
Listen to the full podcast as DeMint also tells Greg Corombos why there isn't much appetite for policy innovation in Congress these days and how people can come together around possible policy solutions in an era when the partisan divide seems wider than ever.NoWhat Conservatives Want to Keephttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/demint1In an interview with Greg Corombos, DeMint explains that conservative means keeping what works best for people.

"It's keeping our covenants, keeping our faith. It's keeping our differences, keeping our republic, which is the decentralized idea that our founders. (It also means) keeping our traditions and keeping our land of opportunities which is all about free market economics," said DeMint.

Listen to the first part of the conversation in the this podcast as DeMint also discusses why progressives see religion as a threat to their political agenda, how politics is becoming a religion to many, and how to defend capitalism at a time when it is constantly labeled a system of greed and selfishness.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19427725Wed, 09 Oct 2019 20:54:00 +0000Radio AmericaWhether a member of the House or Senate, Jim DeMint was known as one of the most conservative lawmakers on Capitol Hill. But what does it mean to be conservative? That's what DeMint and colleague Rachel Bovard address in their new book...In an interview with Greg Corombos, DeMint explains that conservative means keeping what works best for people.

"It's keeping our covenants, keeping our faith. It's keeping our differences, keeping our republic, which is the decentralized idea that our founders. (It also means) keeping our traditions and keeping our land of opportunities which is all about free market economics," said DeMint.

Listen to the first part of the conversation in the this podcast as DeMint also discusses why progressives see religion as a threat to their political agenda, how politics is becoming a religion to many, and how to defend capitalism at a time when it is constantly labeled a system of greed and selfishness.]]>612news,religion,faith,politics,conservative,capitalismcleanfullRadio AmericaWhether a member of the House or Senate, Jim DeMint was known as one of the most conservative lawmakers on Capitol Hill. But what does it mean to be conservative? That's what DeMint and colleague Rachel Bovard address in their new book "Conservative: What to Keep."
In an interview with Greg Corombos, DeMint explains that conservative means keeping what works best for people.
"It's keeping our covenants, keeping our faith. It's keeping our differences, keeping our republic, which is the decentralized idea that our founders. (It also means) keeping our traditions and keeping our land of opportunities which is all about free market economics," said DeMint.
Listen to the first part of the conversation in the this podcast as DeMint also discusses why progressives see religion as a threat to their political agenda, how politics is becoming a religion to many, and how to defend capitalism at a time when it is constantly labeled a system of greed and selfishness.No'Sex' and the Civil Rights Act: Supremes to Decide Definitionhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/spriggOn Tuesday, the justices heard arguments over whether the 1964 Civil Right Act forbidding employer discrimination on the basis of sex simply affords legal protection to women or whether it also ought to extend to sexual orientation and gender identity.

The case before the court centers on three individuals, one of whom is deceased: two men who were allegedly fired for being gay and a biological male who now identifies as a female who was let go from a Michigan funeral home.

Solicitor General Noel Francisco said the Civil Right Act was clearly drafted 55 years ago with the term "sex" clearly intended to mean the difference between male and female, not gay vs. straight.

While advocates for a broader definition of "sex" say an adverse ruling will let them back decades, Family Research Council Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg says it would actually just preserve the status quo. He says the real cultural shift would occur if the court changes what he believes the authors of the Civil Rights Act intended 55 years ago.

"It would be very serious. There would be a significant threat to the freedom of employers to decide what they believe are the appropriate qualifications for their employees. And there would be a particular threat to religious liberty for Christian employers who may be concerned about not wanting to hire people whose lifestyle is not consistent with the teachings of their faith," said Sprigg.

Listen to the full podcast as Sprigg explains why there's a big difference in sexual orientation vs. gender identity in the Civil Rights Act and why conservative groups like the Family Research Council find themselves in common cause with feminists and lesbian groups worried about equating biological men with women.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19413365Wed, 09 Oct 2019 14:34:13 +0000Radio AmericaThe Supreme Court is getting back to business this week and right away the justices are diving into a legal question that could have significant cultural impact.
On Tuesday, the justices heard arguments over whether the 1964 Civil Right Act...On Tuesday, the justices heard arguments over whether the 1964 Civil Right Act forbidding employer discrimination on the basis of sex simply affords legal protection to women or whether it also ought to extend to sexual orientation and gender identity.

The case before the court centers on three individuals, one of whom is deceased: two men who were allegedly fired for being gay and a biological male who now identifies as a female who was let go from a Michigan funeral home.

Solicitor General Noel Francisco said the Civil Right Act was clearly drafted 55 years ago with the term "sex" clearly intended to mean the difference between male and female, not gay vs. straight.

While advocates for a broader definition of "sex" say an adverse ruling will let them back decades, Family Research Council Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg says it would actually just preserve the status quo. He says the real cultural shift would occur if the court changes what he believes the authors of the Civil Rights Act intended 55 years ago.

"It would be very serious. There would be a significant threat to the freedom of employers to decide what they believe are the appropriate qualifications for their employees. And there would be a particular threat to religious liberty for Christian employers who may be concerned about not wanting to hire people whose lifestyle is not consistent with the teachings of their faith," said Sprigg.

Listen to the full podcast as Sprigg explains why there's a big difference in sexual orientation vs. gender identity in the Civil Rights Act and why conservative groups like the Family Research Council find themselves in common cause with feminists and lesbian groups worried about equating biological men with women.]]>685news,lgbt,court,rights,civil,supremecleanfullRadio AmericaThe Supreme Court is getting back to business this week and right away the justices are diving into a legal question that could have significant cultural impact.
On Tuesday, the justices heard arguments over whether the 1964 Civil Right Act forbidding employer discrimination on the basis of sex simply affords legal protection to women or whether it also ought to extend to sexual orientation and gender identity.
The case before the court centers on three individuals, one of whom is deceased: two men who were allegedly fired for being gay and a biological male who now identifies as a female who was let go from a Michigan funeral home.
Solicitor General Noel Francisco said the Civil Right Act was clearly drafted 55 years ago with the term "sex" clearly intended to mean the difference between male and female, not gay vs. straight.
While advocates for a broader definition of "sex" say an adverse ruling will let them back decades, Family Research Council Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg says it would actually just preserve the status quo. He says the real cultural shift would occur if the court changes what he believes the authors of the Civil Rights Act intended 55 years ago.
"It would be very serious. There would be a significant threat to the freedom of employers to decide what they believe are the appropriate qualifications for their employees. And there would be a particular threat to religious liberty for Christian employers who may be concerned about not wanting to hire people whose lifestyle is not consistent with the teachings of their faith," said Sprigg.
Listen to the full podcast as Sprigg explains why there's a big difference in sexual orientation vs. gender identity in the Civil Rights Act and why conservative groups like the Family Research Council find themselves in common cause with feminists and lesbian groups worried about equating biological men with women.NoGOP Congressional Hopeful Slams House Dems: 'These People Are Crazy'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/ivesFormer Illinois State Rep. Jeanne Ives is seeking the Republican nomination in her state's sixth congressional district. The seat is currently held up Democratic Rep. Sean Casten, who defeated longtime GOP incumbent Peter Roskam in 2018.

Ives says Casten needs to go because instead to going to Washington to seek solutions to problems impacting his constituents, he's become a cheerleader for impeachment. She also says Casten has practically become a member of "The Squad," the name given to progressive lawmakers such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, and Ilhan Omar.

"People need to understand: this is the most unreasonable, unserious Congress we've ever elected. Look, if they're not trying to ban your red meat, they want to take away your red hat. I mean that's where they are," said Ives, in an interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos.

Ives points to the push for a Green New Deal as another example of House Democrats, including Casten, losing touch with reality.

"Really? You think the world is coming to an end in ten or maybe it's twelve years? And now you want to rearrange the entire economic engine of not only the State of Illinois but the entire United States because you don't believe in fossil fuels? These people are crazy," said Ives.

Listen to the full podcast to learn what issues matter most to Ives and how she would chart a different course in Washington. She also explains how her ability to get things done while vastly outnumbered by Democrats in the Illinois legislature proves she can get things done in Congress as well.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19391942Mon, 07 Oct 2019 20:01:44 +0000Radio AmericaThe presidential race promises to take up much of the political oxygen in 2020 but a Republican congressional candidate says electing her and a GOP House majority will help restore some sanity to the nation's capital.
Former Illinois State Rep....Former Illinois State Rep. Jeanne Ives is seeking the Republican nomination in her state's sixth congressional district. The seat is currently held up Democratic Rep. Sean Casten, who defeated longtime GOP incumbent Peter Roskam in 2018.

Ives says Casten needs to go because instead to going to Washington to seek solutions to problems impacting his constituents, he's become a cheerleader for impeachment. She also says Casten has practically become a member of "The Squad," the name given to progressive lawmakers such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, and Ilhan Omar.

"People need to understand: this is the most unreasonable, unserious Congress we've ever elected. Look, if they're not trying to ban your red meat, they want to take away your red hat. I mean that's where they are," said Ives, in an interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos.

Ives points to the push for a Green New Deal as another example of House Democrats, including Casten, losing touch with reality.

"Really? You think the world is coming to an end in ten or maybe it's twelve years? And now you want to rearrange the entire economic engine of not only the State of Illinois but the entire United States because you don't believe in fossil fuels? These people are crazy," said Ives.

Listen to the full podcast to learn what issues matter most to Ives and how she would chart a different course in Washington. She also explains how her ability to get things done while vastly outnumbered by Democrats in the Illinois legislature proves she can get things done in Congress as well.]]>609news,trump,congress,illinois,2020,ives,castencleanfullRadio AmericaThe presidential race promises to take up much of the political oxygen in 2020 but a Republican congressional candidate says electing her and a GOP House majority will help restore some sanity to the nation's capital.
Former Illinois State Rep. Jeanne Ives is seeking the Republican nomination in her state's sixth congressional district. The seat is currently held up Democratic Rep. Sean Casten, who defeated longtime GOP incumbent Peter Roskam in 2018.
Ives says Casten needs to go because instead to going to Washington to seek solutions to problems impacting his constituents, he's become a cheerleader for impeachment. She also says Casten has practically become a member of "The Squad," the name given to progressive lawmakers such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, and Ilhan Omar.
"People need to understand: this is the most unreasonable, unserious Congress we've ever elected. Look, if they're not trying to ban your red meat, they want to take away your red hat. I mean that's where they are," said Ives, in an interview with Radio America's Greg Corombos.
Ives points to the push for a Green New Deal as another example of House Democrats, including Casten, losing touch with reality.
"Really? You think the world is coming to an end in ten or maybe it's twelve years? And now you want to rearrange the entire economic engine of not only the State of Illinois but the entire United States because you don't believe in fossil fuels? These people are crazy," said Ives.
Listen to the full podcast to learn what issues matter most to Ives and how she would chart a different course in Washington. She also explains how her ability to get things done while vastly outnumbered by Democrats in the Illinois legislature proves she can get things done in Congress as well.NoActivism to the Point of Absurdity: 'War on History,' Part 2https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/stepman2Stepman also explains how progressives went from tearing down Confederate monuments and statues to trying to remove Abraham Lincoln statues within a matter of months. And he reveals how people interested in preserving accurate history and the world-changing ideas of great Americans can fight back against the effort to erase our past.

Listen here for Part 2 of Stepman's conversation with Greg Corombos.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19357580Fri, 04 Oct 2019 20:15:03 +0000Radio AmericaIn the second half of our interview with "War on History" author Jarrett Stepman, we address how much an historical figure ought to be judged within the context of when they lived and how much ought to be considered by today's standards.
Stepman also...Stepman also explains how progressives went from tearing down Confederate monuments and statues to trying to remove Abraham Lincoln statues within a matter of months. And he reveals how people interested in preserving accurate history and the world-changing ideas of great Americans can fight back against the effort to erase our past.

Listen here for Part 2 of Stepman's conversation with Greg Corombos.]]>663news,history,lee,progressives,lincoln,context,stepmancleanfullRadio AmericaIn the second half of our interview with "War on History" author Jarrett Stepman, we address how much an historical figure ought to be judged within the context of when they lived and how much ought to be considered by today's standards.
Stepman also explains how progressives went from tearing down Confederate monuments and statues to trying to remove Abraham Lincoln statues within a matter of months. And he reveals how people interested in preserving accurate history and the world-changing ideas of great Americans can fight back against the effort to erase our past.
Listen here for Part 2 of Stepman's conversation with Greg Corombos.NoErasing Ideas: 'War on History,' Part 1https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/stepman1In his new book, "War on History: The Conspiracy to Rewrite America's Past," Daily Signal columnist Jarrett Stepman walks readers through every era of American history from Columbus up to modern times and how liberal activists and academics are trying to re-imagine American society by convincing us there's no good reason to remain moored to the people and ideals that got us here.

Listen to the first of our two-part interview with Stepman to hear how this effort to erase American history began, how it went from the radical fringe to conventional wisdom, and what we lose by failing to set the record straight.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19313743Tue, 01 Oct 2019 21:08:14 +0000Radio AmericaFor more than a generation now, Americans are increasingly told by some of our own citizens that America really isn't all that great and never was. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson can't be heroes for their roles in founding the freest society...In his new book, "War on History: The Conspiracy to Rewrite America's Past," Daily Signal columnist Jarrett Stepman walks readers through every era of American history from Columbus up to modern times and how liberal activists and academics are trying to re-imagine American society by convincing us there's no good reason to remain moored to the people and ideals that got us here.

Listen to the first of our two-part interview with Stepman to hear how this effort to erase American history began, how it went from the radical fringe to conventional wisdom, and what we lose by failing to set the record straight.]]>766news,washington,history,liberals,columbus,pilgrimscleanfullRadio AmericaFor more than a generation now, Americans are increasingly told by some of our own citizens that America really isn't all that great and never was. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson can't be heroes for their roles in founding the freest society in history because they owned slaves. Christopher Columbus shouldn't be commended for his daring and courage, and neither should the pilgrims because of their supposed mistreatment of the natives they encountered.
In his new book, "War on History: The Conspiracy to Rewrite America's Past," Daily Signal columnist Jarrett Stepman walks readers through every era of American history from Columbus up to modern times and how liberal activists and academics are trying to re-imagine American society by convincing us there's no good reason to remain moored to the people and ideals that got us here.
Listen to the first of our two-part interview with Stepman to hear how this effort to erase American history began, how it went from the radical fringe to conventional wisdom, and what we lose by failing to set the record straight.NoWould A GOP House Actually Repeal Obamacare?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/jacobsShould they be believed this time?

Republicans made Obamacare repeal the centerpiece of their campaign messaging from 2010-2016. After winning the House, the Senate, and the White House, Republicans tried to move on Obamacare. Ultimately, GOP leaders did not push a straight repeal. Instead they looked to repeal key mandates and make other reforms. The legislation passed the House but died in the Senate.

The individual mandate was ultimately neutered in tax cut legislation, when the Republicans voted to fine people zero dollars for refusing to purchase health insurance.

However, costs are still rising and Americans are deeply frustrated with their coverage. So would Republicans actually move to repeal Obamacare? What other provisions ought to be part of any plan to remove Obamacare but still cover pre-existing conditions, bring down costs, and address other major concerns?

Greg Corombos asks Chris Jacobs, a longtime health policy expert and the author of "The Case Against Single-Payer."

As Democratic presidential hopefuls argue about whether to pursue single-payer or keep private insurance but add a government-run public option, Jacobs explains why he believes those candidates are debating distinctions without a difference. He reveals why a pubic option would also eventually lead us to government-run care.

Listen to the full podcast here.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19297745Mon, 30 Sep 2019 20:56:39 +0000Radio AmericaCongress is currently engulfed in impeachment hearings, subpoenas, and talking points. But House Republicans say if they regain the majority in 2020, they will reduce the debt and repeal Obamacare.
Should they be believed this time?
Republicans made...Should they be believed this time?

Republicans made Obamacare repeal the centerpiece of their campaign messaging from 2010-2016. After winning the House, the Senate, and the White House, Republicans tried to move on Obamacare. Ultimately, GOP leaders did not push a straight repeal. Instead they looked to repeal key mandates and make other reforms. The legislation passed the House but died in the Senate.

The individual mandate was ultimately neutered in tax cut legislation, when the Republicans voted to fine people zero dollars for refusing to purchase health insurance.

However, costs are still rising and Americans are deeply frustrated with their coverage. So would Republicans actually move to repeal Obamacare? What other provisions ought to be part of any plan to remove Obamacare but still cover pre-existing conditions, bring down costs, and address other major concerns?

Greg Corombos asks Chris Jacobs, a longtime health policy expert and the author of "The Case Against Single-Payer."

As Democratic presidential hopefuls argue about whether to pursue single-payer or keep private insurance but add a government-run public option, Jacobs explains why he believes those candidates are debating distinctions without a difference. He reveals why a pubic option would also eventually lead us to government-run care.

Listen to the full podcast here.]]>491news,health,republicans,congress,debt,2020,deficitscleanfullRadio AmericaCongress is currently engulfed in impeachment hearings, subpoenas, and talking points. But House Republicans say if they regain the majority in 2020, they will reduce the debt and repeal Obamacare.
Should they be believed this time?
Republicans made Obamacare repeal the centerpiece of their campaign messaging from 2010-2016. After winning the House, the Senate, and the White House, Republicans tried to move on Obamacare. Ultimately, GOP leaders did not push a straight repeal. Instead they looked to repeal key mandates and make other reforms. The legislation passed the House but died in the Senate.
The individual mandate was ultimately neutered in tax cut legislation, when the Republicans voted to fine people zero dollars for refusing to purchase health insurance.
However, costs are still rising and Americans are deeply frustrated with their coverage. So would Republicans actually move to repeal Obamacare? What other provisions ought to be part of any plan to remove Obamacare but still cover pre-existing conditions, bring down costs, and address other major concerns?
Greg Corombos asks Chris Jacobs, a longtime health policy expert and the author of "The Case Against Single-Payer."
As Democratic presidential hopefuls argue about whether to pursue single-payer or keep private insurance but add a government-run public option, Jacobs explains why he believes those candidates are debating distinctions without a difference. He reveals why a pubic option would also eventually lead us to government-run care.
Listen to the full podcast here.NoMcCarthy on Impeachment: 'The Law Here is Almost Irrelevant'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_10Trump says he will release the unredacted transcript of his call with President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump says he never threatened to cut or stop aid to Ukraine if his request was denied. Zelensky says he did not feel undue pressure to investigate Biden. Democrats say impeachment is warranted even if there was no quid pro quo involved.

Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy tells us why the exact details of the call don't really matter when it comes to impeachment and why it doesn't matter whether Trump broke the law. He also explains why Democrats may pay a heavy political price for going down this road when there's virtually no chance the U.S. Senate would ever remove Trump from office.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19218896Tue, 24 Sep 2019 21:03:33 +0000Radio AmericaHouse Democrats are moving forward on an impeachment inquiry against President Trump. The latest fuel for this effort are allegations that Trump asked the president of Ukraine to re-open an investigation into Hunter Biden, son of Democratic...Trump says he will release the unredacted transcript of his call with President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump says he never threatened to cut or stop aid to Ukraine if his request was denied. Zelensky says he did not feel undue pressure to investigate Biden. Democrats say impeachment is warranted even if there was no quid pro quo involved.

Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy tells us why the exact details of the call don't really matter when it comes to impeachment and why it doesn't matter whether Trump broke the law. He also explains why Democrats may pay a heavy political price for going down this road when there's virtually no chance the U.S. Senate would ever remove Trump from office.]]>279news,house,trump,democrats,pelosi,impeachment,ukrainecleanfullRadio AmericaHouse Democrats are moving forward on an impeachment inquiry against President Trump. The latest fuel for this effort are allegations that Trump asked the president of Ukraine to re-open an investigation into Hunter Biden, son of Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden.
Trump says he will release the unredacted transcript of his call with President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump says he never threatened to cut or stop aid to Ukraine if his request was denied. Zelensky says he did not feel undue pressure to investigate Biden. Democrats say impeachment is warranted even if there was no quid pro quo involved.
Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy tells us why the exact details of the call don't really matter when it comes to impeachment and why it doesn't matter whether Trump broke the law. He also explains why Democrats may pay a heavy political price for going down this road when there's virtually no chance the U.S. Senate would ever remove Trump from office.NoGridlock and Greta: The Politics of Climate Changehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/horner_1Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Christopher C. Horner reacts to the Shut Down D.C. movement and what it actually accomplished - not greater awareness of their cause but fierce anger from motorists and the demonstrators admitting their goal is to crush capitalism.

Horner explains this is nothing new for climate activists. They've actually been open about it for a long time, but the mainstream media stubbornly refuse to take the demonstrators at their word.

Also on Monday, progressive teen sensation Greta Thunberg delivered an angry rebuke to political leaders for not acting on climate change a long time ago. Thunberg accused the leaders of destroying her childhood and her future.

In response, Horner passionately criticizes the adults in the green movement for exploiting Thunberg and explains how the climate movement was planning years ago to use children to build emotional support for their cause.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Horner address these issues and where he thinks this fight is headed next.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19204094Mon, 23 Sep 2019 21:08:08 +0000Radio AmericaOn Monday, the morning commute in Washington, D.C., was snarled by climate demonstrators taking over high profile streets and intersections to demand residents focus on the allegedly urgent need need to confront and reverse climate change. But what...Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Christopher C. Horner reacts to the Shut Down D.C. movement and what it actually accomplished - not greater awareness of their cause but fierce anger from motorists and the demonstrators admitting their goal is to crush capitalism.

Horner explains this is nothing new for climate activists. They've actually been open about it for a long time, but the mainstream media stubbornly refuse to take the demonstrators at their word.

Also on Monday, progressive teen sensation Greta Thunberg delivered an angry rebuke to political leaders for not acting on climate change a long time ago. Thunberg accused the leaders of destroying her childhood and her future.

In response, Horner passionately criticizes the adults in the green movement for exploiting Thunberg and explains how the climate movement was planning years ago to use children to build emotional support for their cause.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Horner address these issues and where he thinks this fight is headed next.]]>741washington,protests,climate,commute,greta,thunbergcleanfullRadio AmericaOn Monday, the morning commute in Washington, D.C., was snarled by climate demonstrators taking over high profile streets and intersections to demand residents focus on the allegedly urgent need need to confront and reverse climate change. But what the activists actually revealed is an anti-capitalist agenda.
Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Christopher C. Horner reacts to the Shut Down D.C. movement and what it actually accomplished - not greater awareness of their cause but fierce anger from motorists and the demonstrators admitting their goal is to crush capitalism.
Horner explains this is nothing new for climate activists. They've actually been open about it for a long time, but the mainstream media stubbornly refuse to take the demonstrators at their word.
Also on Monday, progressive teen sensation Greta Thunberg delivered an angry rebuke to political leaders for not acting on climate change a long time ago. Thunberg accused the leaders of destroying her childhood and her future.
In response, Horner passionately criticizes the adults in the green movement for exploiting Thunberg and explains how the climate movement was planning years ago to use children to build emotional support for their cause.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Horner address these issues and where he thinks this fight is headed next.NoWhat's Next in Israel?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/berman_2Blue and White shows a very slight lead in the election returns, but neither party is anywhere close to having a majority of seats in the Israeli parliament. Both sides say they are willing to forge a unity government but both Netanyahu and Gantz insist on being prime minister.

So what happens now? How will a majority coalition get assembled? What happens if there can be no majority? And how much will things change in Israel if Gantz becomes prime minister?

This podcast addresses all these questions and more as Greg Corombos interview American Foreign Policy Council Senior Vice President Ilan Berman.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19173605Fri, 20 Sep 2019 20:49:24 +0000Radio AmericaOn Tuesday, voters in Israel voted in another round of parliamentary elections. As expected, the results show a virtual dead heat between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud Party and the Blue and White Party led by retired Israeli Gen. Benny...Blue and White shows a very slight lead in the election returns, but neither party is anywhere close to having a majority of seats in the Israeli parliament. Both sides say they are willing to forge a unity government but both Netanyahu and Gantz insist on being prime minister.

So what happens now? How will a majority coalition get assembled? What happens if there can be no majority? And how much will things change in Israel if Gantz becomes prime minister?

This podcast addresses all these questions and more as Greg Corombos interview American Foreign Policy Council Senior Vice President Ilan Berman.]]>590news,israel,gantz,elections,netanyahucleanfullRadio AmericaOn Tuesday, voters in Israel voted in another round of parliamentary elections. As expected, the results show a virtual dead heat between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud Party and the Blue and White Party led by retired Israeli Gen. Benny Gantz.
Blue and White shows a very slight lead in the election returns, but neither party is anywhere close to having a majority of seats in the Israeli parliament. Both sides say they are willing to forge a unity government but both Netanyahu and Gantz insist on being prime minister.
So what happens now? How will a majority coalition get assembled? What happens if there can be no majority? And how much will things change in Israel if Gantz becomes prime minister?
This podcast addresses all these questions and more as Greg Corombos interview American Foreign Policy Council Senior Vice President Ilan Berman.NoEPA Repeals 'Sword of Damocles'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/cohen_2Implemented during the Obama administration, WOTUS gave the federal government the power to regulate much more land in the U.S. be redefining a "navigable" waterway. The rule also forced farmers, ranchers, fruit growers, and other rural land owners to seek federal permission to make any changes to their property.

Digging a drainage ditch or filling in a ditch where water no longer collected without EPA approval could bring heavy fines or even jail time.

The rule paralyzed rural land owners. National Center for Public Policy Research Senior Fellow Dr. Bonner Cohen says the threat of government reprisal turned the rule into the "Sword of Damocles" for land owners.

In this podcast. Dr. Cohen explains the drastic changes made by the Obama administration and the impact of the Trump administration's forthcoming repeal.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19131994Wed, 18 Sep 2019 21:10:32 +0000Radio AmericaEarlier this month, the Environmental Protection Agency announced it was repealing a controversial federal rule known as Waters of the United States. or WOTUS.
Implemented during the Obama administration, WOTUS gave the federal government the power...Implemented during the Obama administration, WOTUS gave the federal government the power to regulate much more land in the U.S. be redefining a "navigable" waterway. The rule also forced farmers, ranchers, fruit growers, and other rural land owners to seek federal permission to make any changes to their property.

Digging a drainage ditch or filling in a ditch where water no longer collected without EPA approval could bring heavy fines or even jail time.

The rule paralyzed rural land owners. National Center for Public Policy Research Senior Fellow Dr. Bonner Cohen says the threat of government reprisal turned the rule into the "Sword of Damocles" for land owners.

In this podcast. Dr. Cohen explains the drastic changes made by the Obama administration and the impact of the Trump administration's forthcoming repeal.]]>634news,obama,trump,rule,regulation,epa,wotuscleanfullRadio AmericaEarlier this month, the Environmental Protection Agency announced it was repealing a controversial federal rule known as Waters of the United States. or WOTUS.
Implemented during the Obama administration, WOTUS gave the federal government the power to regulate much more land in the U.S. be redefining a "navigable" waterway. The rule also forced farmers, ranchers, fruit growers, and other rural land owners to seek federal permission to make any changes to their property.
Digging a drainage ditch or filling in a ditch where water no longer collected without EPA approval could bring heavy fines or even jail time.
The rule paralyzed rural land owners. National Center for Public Policy Research Senior Fellow Dr. Bonner Cohen says the threat of government reprisal turned the rule into the "Sword of Damocles" for land owners.
In this podcast. Dr. Cohen explains the drastic changes made by the Obama administration and the impact of the Trump administration's forthcoming repeal.NoHemingway, Severino Dissect Latest Anti-Kavanaugh Smearhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hemingway-severinoFirst, the person alleging a different lewd incident involving Kavanaugh did not speak to the New York Times. The reporters in the story, who are also set to release a book on Kavanaugh, only spoke to people who say they are familiar with the accusation.

Even more shocking, the Times initially failed to report that the alleged victim in this story has no recollection of the incident in question. The Times finally added that piece of information after being called out by Mollie Hemingway, a senior editor at The Federalist.

Hemingway and Judicial Crisis Network Chief Counsel Carrie Severino are the authors of the #1 bestseller "Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court."

In this interview with Greg Corombos, Hemingway and Severino discuss this latest attempt to accuse Justice Kavanaugh and why they are not at all surprised at this new effort to sully his reputation.

They also discuss the long-term goals of Democrats with respect to the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary, and they reveal the immense political pressure applied to one of Christine Blasey Ford's high school friends last year to verify Ford's initial accusation against Kavanaugh - even though she knew nothing about it.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19119751Mon, 16 Sep 2019 21:13:34 +0000Radio AmericaOver the weekend, the New York Times mentioned a previously unreported allegation about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's conduct while a student at Yale University. But there were some big problems with the accusation.
First, the person...First, the person alleging a different lewd incident involving Kavanaugh did not speak to the New York Times. The reporters in the story, who are also set to release a book on Kavanaugh, only spoke to people who say they are familiar with the accusation.

Even more shocking, the Times initially failed to report that the alleged victim in this story has no recollection of the incident in question. The Times finally added that piece of information after being called out by Mollie Hemingway, a senior editor at The Federalist.

Hemingway and Judicial Crisis Network Chief Counsel Carrie Severino are the authors of the #1 bestseller "Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court."

In this interview with Greg Corombos, Hemingway and Severino discuss this latest attempt to accuse Justice Kavanaugh and why they are not at all surprised at this new effort to sully his reputation.

They also discuss the long-term goals of Democrats with respect to the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary, and they reveal the immense political pressure applied to one of Christine Blasey Ford's high school friends last year to verify Ford's initial accusation against Kavanaugh - even though she knew nothing about it.]]>705news,ford,democrats,scotus,accusation,nyt,kavanaughcleanfullRadio AmericaOver the weekend, the New York Times mentioned a previously unreported allegation about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's conduct while a student at Yale University. But there were some big problems with the accusation.
First, the person alleging a different lewd incident involving Kavanaugh did not speak to the New York Times. The reporters in the story, who are also set to release a book on Kavanaugh, only spoke to people who say they are familiar with the accusation.
Even more shocking, the Times initially failed to report that the alleged victim in this story has no recollection of the incident in question. The Times finally added that piece of information after being called out by Mollie Hemingway, a senior editor at The Federalist.
Hemingway and Judicial Crisis Network Chief Counsel Carrie Severino are the authors of the #1 bestseller "Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court."
In this interview with Greg Corombos, Hemingway and Severino discuss this latest attempt to accuse Justice Kavanaugh and why they are not at all surprised at this new effort to sully his reputation.
They also discuss the long-term goals of Democrats with respect to the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary, and they reveal the immense political pressure applied to one of Christine Blasey Ford's high school friends last year to verify Ford's initial accusation against Kavanaugh - even though she knew nothing about it.NoWhat You're Not Hearing About Vapinghttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/stierBut Consumer Choice Center Senior Fellow Jeff Stier says Trump and the media are missing huge chunks of the real story. As a result, he says the government is about to take sweeping action that will do nothing to solve the problem and will actually make it much worse.

While Stier admits he tends to let adults make their own decisions on products like vaping, his frustration over Trump's decision is that it's not supported by the facts.

According to Stier, e-cigarettes are 95 percent less harmful than traditional cigarettes and millions of ex-smokers are now healthier because they switched to vaping.

Furthermore, Stier says nicotine vaping is not related to the health scares and deaths seen in recent weeks. It's actually street versions of vapes with very different ingredients.

"Every bit of scientific evidence that we have (of the damaging vapes) points to vaping of THC butane hash oil contaminated with Vitamin E acetate, which should never be heated and inhaled into the lungs," said Stier.

Stier says banning nicotine vapes for problems they don't cause would be like banning hypodermic needles because some use them to inject damaging drugs into their systems.

Listen to the full podcast as Stier explains what will happen to the number of medical emergencies linked to vaping if the FDA follows through on this ban.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19083539Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:27:36 +0000Radio AmericaOn Wednesday, President Trump announced the Food and Drug Administration will be finalizing the details to ban all non-tobacco flavored vaping products. The action comes after a number of recent deaths and hospitalizations were blamed on vaping.
But...But Consumer Choice Center Senior Fellow Jeff Stier says Trump and the media are missing huge chunks of the real story. As a result, he says the government is about to take sweeping action that will do nothing to solve the problem and will actually make it much worse.

While Stier admits he tends to let adults make their own decisions on products like vaping, his frustration over Trump's decision is that it's not supported by the facts.

According to Stier, e-cigarettes are 95 percent less harmful than traditional cigarettes and millions of ex-smokers are now healthier because they switched to vaping.

Furthermore, Stier says nicotine vaping is not related to the health scares and deaths seen in recent weeks. It's actually street versions of vapes with very different ingredients.

"Every bit of scientific evidence that we have (of the damaging vapes) points to vaping of THC butane hash oil contaminated with Vitamin E acetate, which should never be heated and inhaled into the lungs," said Stier.

Stier says banning nicotine vapes for problems they don't cause would be like banning hypodermic needles because some use them to inject damaging drugs into their systems.

Listen to the full podcast as Stier explains what will happen to the number of medical emergencies linked to vaping if the FDA follows through on this ban.]]>589news,health,trump,vapingcleanfullRadio AmericaOn Wednesday, President Trump announced the Food and Drug Administration will be finalizing the details to ban all non-tobacco flavored vaping products. The action comes after a number of recent deaths and hospitalizations were blamed on vaping.
But Consumer Choice Center Senior Fellow Jeff Stier says Trump and the media are missing huge chunks of the real story. As a result, he says the government is about to take sweeping action that will do nothing to solve the problem and will actually make it much worse.
While Stier admits he tends to let adults make their own decisions on products like vaping, his frustration over Trump's decision is that it's not supported by the facts.
According to Stier, e-cigarettes are 95 percent less harmful than traditional cigarettes and millions of ex-smokers are now healthier because they switched to vaping.
Furthermore, Stier says nicotine vaping is not related to the health scares and deaths seen in recent weeks. It's actually street versions of vapes with very different ingredients.
"Every bit of scientific evidence that we have (of the damaging vapes) points to vaping of THC butane hash oil contaminated with Vitamin E acetate, which should never be heated and inhaled into the lungs," said Stier.
Stier says banning nicotine vapes for problems they don't cause would be like banning hypodermic needles because some use them to inject damaging drugs into their systems.
Listen to the full podcast as Stier explains what will happen to the number of medical emergencies linked to vaping if the FDA follows through on this ban.No'These Babies Are Being Butchered Alive'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/staver_4David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of the Center for Medical Progress went undercover to interview Planned Parenthood officials and executives from various labs. Those officials openly described how the system worked in a series of 2015 videos.

After initially expressing revulsion at what was discussed on the videos, Planned Parenthood went on offense to bring the legal fight to Daleiden and Merritt for allegedly recording people without their consent - something that is usually illegal in California.

But in recent testimony, the CEO of of the research lab Stem Express confirmed what the videos show.

Known only as Doe 12 to the court, the CEO admitted to wanting fetuses delivered "intact" before various organs or tissue are procured for the labs. And the defense says that description means exactly what it sounds like.

"In their words, the better the body part that's intact and whole, the more they can get for the sale of that body part. That's what they sell to Stem Express and other entities, such as Stanford University," said Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver, whose organization is providing legal counsel to Sandra Merritt.

Staver gave specific examples.

"Doe 12 has now admitted on the stand that she sold some of these intact body parts to Stanford University, including intact brains. In order to have an intact brain, you have to have it attached to the body and then remove it after the baby is outside of the womb. So these babies are being butchered alive," said Staver.

"We will also have information about beating hearts, that the hearts once they're removed have to remain beating, which means that they're beating at the time that they're removed and they continue to remain in a beating state through artificial electrical stimulation until they get to the research and other specimen labs.

"What we're talking about is killing, butchering live babies for profit," said Staver.

Listen to the full podcast to learn why Staver believes the law is strongly on the side of Daleiden and Merritt concerning the secret recordings.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19072265Wed, 11 Sep 2019 21:28:06 +0000Radio AmericaThe criminal case against two pro-life activists who exposed Planned Parenthood's sale of aborted baby body parts is unfolding in California, but the biggest revelations to date concern how babies are treated in the desire to turn a profit.
David...David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of the Center for Medical Progress went undercover to interview Planned Parenthood officials and executives from various labs. Those officials openly described how the system worked in a series of 2015 videos.

After initially expressing revulsion at what was discussed on the videos, Planned Parenthood went on offense to bring the legal fight to Daleiden and Merritt for allegedly recording people without their consent - something that is usually illegal in California.

But in recent testimony, the CEO of of the research lab Stem Express confirmed what the videos show.

Known only as Doe 12 to the court, the CEO admitted to wanting fetuses delivered "intact" before various organs or tissue are procured for the labs. And the defense says that description means exactly what it sounds like.

"In their words, the better the body part that's intact and whole, the more they can get for the sale of that body part. That's what they sell to Stem Express and other entities, such as Stanford University," said Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver, whose organization is providing legal counsel to Sandra Merritt.

Staver gave specific examples.

"Doe 12 has now admitted on the stand that she sold some of these intact body parts to Stanford University, including intact brains. In order to have an intact brain, you have to have it attached to the body and then remove it after the baby is outside of the womb. So these babies are being butchered alive," said Staver.

"We will also have information about beating hearts, that the hearts once they're removed have to remain beating, which means that they're beating at the time that they're removed and they continue to remain in a beating state through artificial electrical stimulation until they get to the research and other specimen labs.

"What we're talking about is killing, butchering live babies for profit," said Staver.

Listen to the full podcast to learn why Staver believes the law is strongly on the side of Daleiden and Merritt concerning the secret recordings.]]>545news,abortion,parenthood,merritt,planned,daleidencleanfullRadio AmericaThe criminal case against two pro-life activists who exposed Planned Parenthood's sale of aborted baby body parts is unfolding in California, but the biggest revelations to date concern how babies are treated in the desire to turn a profit.
David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of the Center for Medical Progress went undercover to interview Planned Parenthood officials and executives from various labs. Those officials openly described how the system worked in a series of 2015 videos.
After initially expressing revulsion at what was discussed on the videos, Planned Parenthood went on offense to bring the legal fight to Daleiden and Merritt for allegedly recording people without their consent - something that is usually illegal in California.
But in recent testimony, the CEO of of the research lab Stem Express confirmed what the videos show.
Known only as Doe 12 to the court, the CEO admitted to wanting fetuses delivered "intact" before various organs or tissue are procured for the labs. And the defense says that description means exactly what it sounds like.
"In their words, the better the body part that's intact and whole, the more they can get for the sale of that body part. That's what they sell to Stem Express and other entities, such as Stanford University," said Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver, whose organization is providing legal counsel to Sandra Merritt.
Staver gave specific examples.
"Doe 12 has now admitted on the stand that she sold some of these intact body parts to Stanford University, including intact brains. In order to have an intact brain, you have to have it attached to the body and then remove it after the baby is outside of the womb. So these babies are being butchered alive," said Staver.
"We will also have information about beating hearts, that the hearts once they're removed have to remain beating, which means that they're beating at the time that they're removed and they continue to remain in a beating state through artificial electrical stimulation until they get to the research and other specimen labs.
"What we're talking about is killing, butchering live babies for profit," said Staver.
Listen to the full podcast to learn why Staver believes the law is strongly on the side of Daleiden and Merritt concerning the secret recordings.NoInside the Pentagon on 9/11https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/joyceAt 9:37 a.m., those fears were proven true.

In this interview from the one-year anniversary of 9/11, Joyce walks us through what happened that morning, and how he and his colleagues responded after American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. He also recounts the immediate resolve of everyone in the building and how his Christian faith sustained him during those difficult days.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19071915Wed, 11 Sep 2019 20:26:56 +0000Radio AmericaOn September 11, 2001, U.S. Navy Captain Tom Joyce was at his post in the Pentagon. After learning of the attacks in New York City, he knew America was under attack and that the Pentagon could be a target.
At 9:37 a.m., those fears were proven true....At 9:37 a.m., those fears were proven true.

In this interview from the one-year anniversary of 9/11, Joyce walks us through what happened that morning, and how he and his colleagues responded after American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. He also recounts the immediate resolve of everyone in the building and how his Christian faith sustained him during those difficult days.]]>399news,military,qaeda,terrorism,9/11,al,navy,pentagoncleanfullRadio AmericaOn September 11, 2001, U.S. Navy Captain Tom Joyce was at his post in the Pentagon. After learning of the attacks in New York City, he knew America was under attack and that the Pentagon could be a target.
At 9:37 a.m., those fears were proven true.
In this interview from the one-year anniversary of 9/11, Joyce walks us through what happened that morning, and how he and his colleagues responded after American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. He also recounts the immediate resolve of everyone in the building and how his Christian faith sustained him during those difficult days.NoBolton Out as National Security Adviserhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/babbinThe debate continues as to whether Bolton resigned (as he claims) or whether he was fired, as Trump insists. More importantly, what impact did Bolton have on the Trump administration? Why was the proposed meeting with the Taliban at Camp David the final straw?

Former Pentagon official Jed Babbin believes Bolton was trying to influence Trump in the right direction.

"He was a hard liner and trying to restrain Mr. Trump's straying off of America's best interests," said Babbin, who served as a deputy undersecretary of defense in the George H.W. Bush administration."I would think that a lot of the things you saw, in respect to Iran in particular, with Mr. Trump going ahead with a very hard line against Iran is certainly due to Bolton," added Babbin.

As mentioned in Trump's tweets announcing Bolton's departure, the president and Bolton disagreed about many policies, most recently whether to hold a summit with the Taliban at Camp David. Trump scuttled the meeting after a terrorist attack killed an American service member, but seemed very much in favor of the idea while reports show Bolton adamantly opposed it.

Babbin says the meeting was a "horrid" idea.

"First off, we did not have an agreement. You don't bring the president in to sign the outline of an agreement, which was apparently Mr. Trump's idea that he would get together with the Taliban to do," said Babbin, who also blasted the negotiations with the Taliban to this point.

"Number two, you have to have preconditions to any negotiation really. When (lead U.S. negotiator) Zalmay Khalilzad went in there without first demanding a cease-fire in Afghanistan that lasted more than ten minutes, that was a huge mistake," said Babbin.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Babbin's assessment of Trump's approach to North Korea and what kind of successor to Bolton is likely to emerge. Babbin also explains why it "beats the snot out of me" what the Trump approach to foreign policy actually is.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19061805Tue, 10 Sep 2019 21:11:47 +0000Radio AmericaPresident Trump is looking for his fourth National Security Adviser in less than three years following the departure of John Bolton on Tuesday, just 18 months after taking the job.
The debate continues as to whether Bolton resigned (as he claims) or...The debate continues as to whether Bolton resigned (as he claims) or whether he was fired, as Trump insists. More importantly, what impact did Bolton have on the Trump administration? Why was the proposed meeting with the Taliban at Camp David the final straw?

Former Pentagon official Jed Babbin believes Bolton was trying to influence Trump in the right direction.

"He was a hard liner and trying to restrain Mr. Trump's straying off of America's best interests," said Babbin, who served as a deputy undersecretary of defense in the George H.W. Bush administration."I would think that a lot of the things you saw, in respect to Iran in particular, with Mr. Trump going ahead with a very hard line against Iran is certainly due to Bolton," added Babbin.

As mentioned in Trump's tweets announcing Bolton's departure, the president and Bolton disagreed about many policies, most recently whether to hold a summit with the Taliban at Camp David. Trump scuttled the meeting after a terrorist attack killed an American service member, but seemed very much in favor of the idea while reports show Bolton adamantly opposed it.

Babbin says the meeting was a "horrid" idea.

"First off, we did not have an agreement. You don't bring the president in to sign the outline of an agreement, which was apparently Mr. Trump's idea that he would get together with the Taliban to do," said Babbin, who also blasted the negotiations with the Taliban to this point.

"Number two, you have to have preconditions to any negotiation really. When (lead U.S. negotiator) Zalmay Khalilzad went in there without first demanding a cease-fire in Afghanistan that lasted more than ten minutes, that was a huge mistake," said Babbin.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Babbin's assessment of Trump's approach to North Korea and what kind of successor to Bolton is likely to emerge. Babbin also explains why it "beats the snot out of me" what the Trump approach to foreign policy actually is.]]>402news,taliban,trump,korea,iran,boltoncleanfullRadio AmericaPresident Trump is looking for his fourth National Security Adviser in less than three years following the departure of John Bolton on Tuesday, just 18 months after taking the job.
The debate continues as to whether Bolton resigned (as he claims) or whether he was fired, as Trump insists. More importantly, what impact did Bolton have on the Trump administration? Why was the proposed meeting with the Taliban at Camp David the final straw?
Former Pentagon official Jed Babbin believes Bolton was trying to influence Trump in the right direction.
"He was a hard liner and trying to restrain Mr. Trump's straying off of America's best interests," said Babbin, who served as a deputy undersecretary of defense in the George H.W. Bush administration.
"I would think that a lot of the things you saw, in respect to Iran in particular, with Mr. Trump going ahead with a very hard line against Iran is certainly due to Bolton," added Babbin.
As mentioned in Trump's tweets announcing Bolton's departure, the president and Bolton disagreed about many policies, most recently whether to hold a summit with the Taliban at Camp David. Trump scuttled the meeting after a terrorist attack killed an American service member, but seemed very much in favor of the idea while reports show Bolton adamantly opposed it.
Babbin says the meeting was a "horrid" idea.
"First off, we did not have an agreement. You don't bring the president in to sign the outline of an agreement, which was apparently Mr. Trump's idea that he would get together with the Taliban to do," said Babbin, who also blasted the negotiations with the Taliban to this point.
"Number two, you have to have preconditions to any negotiation really. When (lead U.S. negotiator) Zalmay Khalilzad went in there without first demanding a cease-fire in Afghanistan that lasted more than ten minutes, that was a huge mistake," said Babbin.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Babbin's assessment of Trump's approach to North Korea and what kind of successor to Bolton is likely to emerge. Babbin also explains why it "beats the snot out of me" what the Trump approach to foreign policy actually is.NoThe Cost of Telling Climate Truthshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/ball2In addition to interviews, Dr. Ball also makes presentations confronting the conventional wisdom among scientists. But instead of responding with a robust debate, the climate change advocates instead ridicule Dr. Ball and they sue him - a lot.

Dr. Ball, who taught climatology at the University of Winnipeg, was the target of multiple lawsuits known as SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) suits. Every contested case against him has been dismissed, with one still pending. And they get dismissed because the plaintiffs refuse to engage Dr. Ball on the scientific merits. But standing up for himself in court has cost Dr. Ball $800,000.

In this podcast, Ball explains the real reason is is sued for defamation. He says it's because he has the gall to confront a movement that refuses to tolerate any dissension.

"What people should be worried about is the increasing use of the law to silence people," said Dr. Ball.

Listen to the full podcast, as Dr. Ball explains why the "scientific consensus" is bogus, why climate scientists often stay silent out fear of reprisal, and the ones who do look at the evidence are appalled at what has been allowed to pass for concrete science.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19051418Mon, 09 Sep 2019 21:11:50 +0000Radio AmericaFor many years, Dr. Tim Ball has joined us to explain climate science, how the climate is changing, and how those changes differ drastically from with the United Nations, politicians and the media insist are the facts about climate change.
In...In addition to interviews, Dr. Ball also makes presentations confronting the conventional wisdom among scientists. But instead of responding with a robust debate, the climate change advocates instead ridicule Dr. Ball and they sue him - a lot.

Dr. Ball, who taught climatology at the University of Winnipeg, was the target of multiple lawsuits known as SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) suits. Every contested case against him has been dismissed, with one still pending. And they get dismissed because the plaintiffs refuse to engage Dr. Ball on the scientific merits. But standing up for himself in court has cost Dr. Ball $800,000.

In this podcast, Ball explains the real reason is is sued for defamation. He says it's because he has the gall to confront a movement that refuses to tolerate any dissension.

"What people should be worried about is the increasing use of the law to silence people," said Dr. Ball.

Listen to the full podcast, as Dr. Ball explains why the "scientific consensus" is bogus, why climate scientists often stay silent out fear of reprisal, and the ones who do look at the evidence are appalled at what has been allowed to pass for concrete science.]]>1014news,change,science,ball,climate,lawsuits,defamation,slappcleanfullRadio AmericaFor many years, Dr. Tim Ball has joined us to explain climate science, how the climate is changing, and how those changes differ drastically from with the United Nations, politicians and the media insist are the facts about climate change.
In addition to interviews, Dr. Ball also makes presentations confronting the conventional wisdom among scientists. But instead of responding with a robust debate, the climate change advocates instead ridicule Dr. Ball and they sue him - a lot.
Dr. Ball, who taught climatology at the University of Winnipeg, was the target of multiple lawsuits known as SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) suits. Every contested case against him has been dismissed, with one still pending. And they get dismissed because the plaintiffs refuse to engage Dr. Ball on the scientific merits. But standing up for himself in court has cost Dr. Ball $800,000.
In this podcast, Ball explains the real reason is is sued for defamation. He says it's because he has the gall to confront a movement that refuses to tolerate any dissension.
"What people should be worried about is the increasing use of the law to silence people," said Dr. Ball.
Listen to the full podcast, as Dr. Ball explains why the "scientific consensus" is bogus, why climate scientists often stay silent out fear of reprisal, and the ones who do look at the evidence are appalled at what has been allowed to pass for concrete science.NoWhat's Behind the Dems' Climate Hysteria?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/ball1Over the course of several hours, former Vice President Joe Biden endorsed shutting down all coal-fired power plants. Sen. Kamala Harris said she would ban fracking. Sen. Bernie Sanders vowed to expand abortion to control the population. And former Rep. Beto O'Rourke claimed he told his son their hometown of El Paso, Texas, would soon be uninhabitable.

"This is pure alarmism based on absolute ignorance," said Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg. He is also the author of :The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science."

"These people haven't got a clue what they're talking about. They don't even know the difference between weather and climate," said Ball.

Ball says candidates like Harris and Biden - and the others - are attacking coal and fracking because their entire climate agenda consists of the assumption that carbon dioxide is the problem and we have to stop burning it to fuel our society.

Listen to the entire podcast as Dr. Ball explains where the Democrats base their argument that we have only eleven years to do anything about the "climate crisis" and why the science behind that conclusion is bogus. He also reveals which direction the earth's temperature is quickly heading, and it's not what the activists would have you believe.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19028419Sat, 07 Sep 2019 00:29:04 +0000Radio AmericaThis week, many Democrats running for president appeared in a marathon CNN town hall to demand sweeping, urgent action on climate change, but a leading climate scientist says it's little more than hot air.
Over the course of several hours, former...Over the course of several hours, former Vice President Joe Biden endorsed shutting down all coal-fired power plants. Sen. Kamala Harris said she would ban fracking. Sen. Bernie Sanders vowed to expand abortion to control the population. And former Rep. Beto O'Rourke claimed he told his son their hometown of El Paso, Texas, would soon be uninhabitable.

"This is pure alarmism based on absolute ignorance," said Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg. He is also the author of :The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science."

"These people haven't got a clue what they're talking about. They don't even know the difference between weather and climate," said Ball.

Ball says candidates like Harris and Biden - and the others - are attacking coal and fracking because their entire climate agenda consists of the assumption that carbon dioxide is the problem and we have to stop burning it to fuel our society.

Listen to the entire podcast as Dr. Ball explains where the Democrats base their argument that we have only eleven years to do anything about the "climate crisis" and why the science behind that conclusion is bogus. He also reveals which direction the earth's temperature is quickly heading, and it's not what the activists would have you believe.]]>908news,un,democrats,carbon,climate,coal,fracking,2020cleanfullRadio AmericaThis week, many Democrats running for president appeared in a marathon CNN town hall to demand sweeping, urgent action on climate change, but a leading climate scientist says it's little more than hot air.
Over the course of several hours, former Vice President Joe Biden endorsed shutting down all coal-fired power plants. Sen. Kamala Harris said she would ban fracking. Sen. Bernie Sanders vowed to expand abortion to control the population. And former Rep. Beto O'Rourke claimed he told his son their hometown of El Paso, Texas, would soon be uninhabitable.
"This is pure alarmism based on absolute ignorance," said Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg. He is also the author of :The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science."
"These people haven't got a clue what they're talking about. They don't even know the difference between weather and climate," said Ball.
Ball says candidates like Harris and Biden - and the others - are attacking coal and fracking because their entire climate agenda consists of the assumption that carbon dioxide is the problem and we have to stop burning it to fuel our society.
Listen to the entire podcast as Dr. Ball explains where the Democrats base their argument that we have only eleven years to do anything about the "climate crisis" and why the science behind that conclusion is bogus. He also reveals which direction the earth's temperature is quickly heading, and it's not what the activists would have you believe.NoBreaking Down A Baffling Week in British Politicshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/coffeyWhy did Prime Minister Boris Johnson ask Queen Elizabeth II to suspend parliament? Why did this common tactic cause such a stir that Johnson lost his working majority in parliament? Why does Johnson want new elections? Why does parliament oppose them?

Listen to the full podcast as we address all of these questions and discuss the impact of all of this on Brexit and why there's such a sharp divide between what the public wants and what parliament wants.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19028361Sat, 07 Sep 2019 00:11:57 +0000Radio AmericaLuke Coffey, direction of the Allison Center for Foreign Policy at the Heritage Foundation, explains what happened in the UK this week and why.
Why did Prime Minister Boris Johnson ask Queen Elizabeth II to suspend parliament? Why did this common...Why did Prime Minister Boris Johnson ask Queen Elizabeth II to suspend parliament? Why did this common tactic cause such a stir that Johnson lost his working majority in parliament? Why does Johnson want new elections? Why does parliament oppose them?

Listen to the full podcast as we address all of these questions and discuss the impact of all of this on Brexit and why there's such a sharp divide between what the public wants and what parliament wants.]]>907news,britain,parliament,johnson,brexitcleanfullRadio AmericaLuke Coffey, direction of the Allison Center for Foreign Policy at the Heritage Foundation, explains what happened in the UK this week and why.
Why did Prime Minister Boris Johnson ask Queen Elizabeth II to suspend parliament? Why did this common tactic cause such a stir that Johnson lost his working majority in parliament? Why does Johnson want new elections? Why does parliament oppose them?
Listen to the full podcast as we address all of these questions and discuss the impact of all of this on Brexit and why there's such a sharp divide between what the public wants and what parliament wants.NoInside the Hong Kong Protestshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/chang_4Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam announced she is officially withdrawing legislation that would have allowed Hong Kong residents to be extradited to mainland China. Had she done that in April, it may have been enough to satisfy critics, but months of intransigence and increased police crackdowns on protesters soured relations exponentially.

Demonstrators now want a full investigation into the actions of police. They want all incarcerated protesters released and they want to have universal suffrage to elect their own chief executive and lawmakers.

Asia policy expert Gordon Chang is author of "The Coming Collapse of China." He is in Hong Kong and took to the streets with demonstrators after Lam's announcement.

Listen to the podcast to hear how Hong Kong residents reacted to the withdrawal of the extradition legislation and how they view this battle for their freedom. Chang also explains why China may have relented on the extradition issue now and why the ongoing protests present a more difficult challenge for Beijing than many realize. He also reveals why the protesters are not going anywhere anytime soon.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19003130Wed, 04 Sep 2019 21:09:00 +0000Radio AmericaOn Wednesday, the China-backed leader of Hong Kong announced she is withdrawing the legislation that sparked massive ongoing protests, but a leading Asia expert says that will do nothing to quell other demands of the millions of people taking to the...Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam announced she is officially withdrawing legislation that would have allowed Hong Kong residents to be extradited to mainland China. Had she done that in April, it may have been enough to satisfy critics, but months of intransigence and increased police crackdowns on protesters soured relations exponentially.

Demonstrators now want a full investigation into the actions of police. They want all incarcerated protesters released and they want to have universal suffrage to elect their own chief executive and lawmakers.

Asia policy expert Gordon Chang is author of "The Coming Collapse of China." He is in Hong Kong and took to the streets with demonstrators after Lam's announcement.

Listen to the podcast to hear how Hong Kong residents reacted to the withdrawal of the extradition legislation and how they view this battle for their freedom. Chang also explains why China may have relented on the extradition issue now and why the ongoing protests present a more difficult challenge for Beijing than many realize. He also reveals why the protesters are not going anywhere anytime soon.]]>523china,freedom,protests,extradition,beijing,hongkongcleanfullRadio AmericaOn Wednesday, the China-backed leader of Hong Kong announced she is withdrawing the legislation that sparked massive ongoing protests, but a leading Asia expert says that will do nothing to quell other demands of the millions of people taking to the streets.
Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam announced she is officially withdrawing legislation that would have allowed Hong Kong residents to be extradited to mainland China. Had she done that in April, it may have been enough to satisfy critics, but months of intransigence and increased police crackdowns on protesters soured relations exponentially.
Demonstrators now want a full investigation into the actions of police. They want all incarcerated protesters released and they want to have universal suffrage to elect their own chief executive and lawmakers.
Asia policy expert Gordon Chang is author of "The Coming Collapse of China." He is in Hong Kong and took to the streets with demonstrators after Lam's announcement.
Listen to the podcast to hear how Hong Kong residents reacted to the withdrawal of the extradition legislation and how they view this battle for their freedom. Chang also explains why China may have relented on the extradition issue now and why the ongoing protests present a more difficult challenge for Beijing than many realize. He also reveals why the protesters are not going anywhere anytime soon.NoThe State of American Labor on Labor Dayhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mix_1Last year, right to work advocates also scored a major win at the U.S. Supreme Court. Justices struck down a precedent dating back to the 1970's to rule that government sector workers cannot be required to join government sector unions or pay dues.

So where does the debate over compulsory union membership stand now? What right to work states are witnessing major efforts to reverse those laws? And what will labor policy look like if a Democrat wins the White House next year.

Listen to the podcast as Greg Corombos discusses all of this and more with Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18961231Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:28:07 +0000Radio AmericaAs America pauses for Labor Day, the battle between organized labor and the right to work movement remains intense. Right now, 27 states have right to work laws, which do not compel union membership or dues payments as a prerequisite for holding any...Last year, right to work advocates also scored a major win at the U.S. Supreme Court. Justices struck down a precedent dating back to the 1970's to rule that government sector workers cannot be required to join government sector unions or pay dues.

So where does the debate over compulsory union membership stand now? What right to work states are witnessing major efforts to reverse those laws? And what will labor policy look like if a Democrat wins the White House next year.

Listen to the podcast as Greg Corombos discusses all of this and more with Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.]]>745news,to,work,right,labor,2020cleanfullRadio AmericaAs America pauses for Labor Day, the battle between organized labor and the right to work movement remains intense. Right now, 27 states have right to work laws, which do not compel union membership or dues payments as a prerequisite for holding any job.
Last year, right to work advocates also scored a major win at the U.S. Supreme Court. Justices struck down a precedent dating back to the 1970's to rule that government sector workers cannot be required to join government sector unions or pay dues.
So where does the debate over compulsory union membership stand now? What right to work states are witnessing major efforts to reverse those laws? And what will labor policy look like if a Democrat wins the White House next year.
Listen to the podcast as Greg Corombos discusses all of this and more with Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.NoIG Report Blasts Comey, More Scrutiny Cominghttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/toensing_3The report blasts Comey for keeping personal memos after meeting with President Trump in his capacity as FBI director and then leaking memos to the media after Trump fired him as part of Comey's effort to trigger a special counsel probe. Then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein tapped former FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III for the job just days after Trump fired Comey.

Former Justice Department official Victoria Toensing, a longtime Comey critic, says this condemnation in the IG report comes as no surprise.

"We knew that there was a recommendation for prosecution, so it wasn't going to be wine and roses from the IG," said Toensing.

The Justice Department ultimately decided not to prosecute Comey.

However, Thursday's report is far from the end for Comey and ongoing review of how the Trump-Russia probe began. In particular, Toensing is looking forward to the next offering from Inspector General Horowitz.

"I'm look for the IG report on the FISA abuse, and certainly Comey was part of that," said Toensing. "James Comey signed an application to the FISA court that said 'all the material in here has been verified.'

"We know from (The Hill columnist) John Solomon's reporting that the FBI had a diagram of a chart of all the accusations and 90 percent was not verifiable," said Toensing.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Toensing explain why she thinks the Justice Department was absolutely right not to prosecute Comey for mishandling documents and leaking them to the media and why she believes the government must prosecute former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

She also reacts to Comey's contention that the IG report exonerates him.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18951873Thu, 29 Aug 2019 21:00:28 +0000Radio AmericaJustice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz blasted former FBI Director James Comey Thursday, accusing him of violating FBI policies and his own employment agreement in an effort to launch a special counsel investigation of President Trump....The report blasts Comey for keeping personal memos after meeting with President Trump in his capacity as FBI director and then leaking memos to the media after Trump fired him as part of Comey's effort to trigger a special counsel probe. Then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein tapped former FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III for the job just days after Trump fired Comey.

Former Justice Department official Victoria Toensing, a longtime Comey critic, says this condemnation in the IG report comes as no surprise.

"We knew that there was a recommendation for prosecution, so it wasn't going to be wine and roses from the IG," said Toensing.

The Justice Department ultimately decided not to prosecute Comey.

However, Thursday's report is far from the end for Comey and ongoing review of how the Trump-Russia probe began. In particular, Toensing is looking forward to the next offering from Inspector General Horowitz.

"I'm look for the IG report on the FISA abuse, and certainly Comey was part of that," said Toensing. "James Comey signed an application to the FISA court that said 'all the material in here has been verified.'

"We know from (The Hill columnist) John Solomon's reporting that the FBI had a diagram of a chart of all the accusations and 90 percent was not verifiable," said Toensing.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Toensing explain why she thinks the Justice Department was absolutely right not to prosecute Comey for mishandling documents and leaking them to the media and why she believes the government must prosecute former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

She also reacts to Comey's contention that the IG report exonerates him.]]>267news,michael,trump,general,doj,russia,fbi,inspector,comey,horowitzcleanfullRadio AmericaJustice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz blasted former FBI Director James Comey Thursday, accusing him of violating FBI policies and his own employment agreement in an effort to launch a special counsel investigation of President Trump.
The report blasts Comey for keeping personal memos after meeting with President Trump in his capacity as FBI director and then leaking memos to the media after Trump fired him as part of Comey's effort to trigger a special counsel probe. Then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein tapped former FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III for the job just days after Trump fired Comey.
Former Justice Department official Victoria Toensing, a longtime Comey critic, says this condemnation in the IG report comes as no surprise.
"We knew that there was a recommendation for prosecution, so it wasn't going to be wine and roses from the IG," said Toensing.
The Justice Department ultimately decided not to prosecute Comey.
However, Thursday's report is far from the end for Comey and ongoing review of how the Trump-Russia probe began. In particular, Toensing is looking forward to the next offering from Inspector General Horowitz.
"I'm look for the IG report on the FISA abuse, and certainly Comey was part of that," said Toensing. "James Comey signed an application to the FISA court that said 'all the material in here has been verified.'
"We know from (The Hill columnist) John Solomon's reporting that the FBI had a diagram of a chart of all the accusations and 90 percent was not verifiable," said Toensing.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Toensing explain why she thinks the Justice Department was absolutely right not to prosecute Comey for mishandling documents and leaking them to the media and why she believes the government must prosecute former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
She also reacts to Comey's contention that the IG report exonerates him.NoNow What? - Ball of Collusion, Part 4https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/collusion4What answers can we realistically expect from the Justice Department's inspector general and from Attorney General Bill Barr's investigation? Beyond that, how badly damaged is the credibility of the Justice Department and the FBI as a result of all this and how can that reputation be repaired.

Listen to the podcast as McCarthy explains that repairing the credibility of the DOJ and FBI is directly related to whether anyone is held responsible for what those institutions did to lose so much trust in the first place.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18951872Thu, 29 Aug 2019 19:56:59 +0000Radio AmericaIn the final part of our conversation, "Ball of Collusion" author Andrew C. McCarthy pivots from how the Trump-Russia unfolded to where we go from here.
What answers can we realistically expect from the Justice Department's inspector general and...What answers can we realistically expect from the Justice Department's inspector general and from Attorney General Bill Barr's investigation? Beyond that, how badly damaged is the credibility of the Justice Department and the FBI as a result of all this and how can that reputation be repaired.

Listen to the podcast as McCarthy explains that repairing the credibility of the DOJ and FBI is directly related to whether anyone is held responsible for what those institutions did to lose so much trust in the first place.]]>531news,trump,doj,russia,fbi,mccarthy,collusioncleanfullRadio AmericaIn the final part of our conversation, "Ball of Collusion" author Andrew C. McCarthy pivots from how the Trump-Russia unfolded to where we go from here.
What answers can we realistically expect from the Justice Department's inspector general and from Attorney General Bill Barr's investigation? Beyond that, how badly damaged is the credibility of the Justice Department and the FBI as a result of all this and how can that reputation be repaired.
Listen to the podcast as McCarthy explains that repairing the credibility of the DOJ and FBI is directly related to whether anyone is held responsible for what those institutions did to lose so much trust in the first place.NoHow DNC Emails & Trump Himself Fueled Collusion Narrative - Ball of Collusion, Part 3https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/collusion3In our new podcast, McCarthy details the meandering path of the supposed genesis of the investigation, including the various human sources used to incriminate Carter Page and George Papadopoulos. The operatives were later identified as figures such as Alexander Downer, Stefan Halper, and Joseph Mifsud.

"Papadopoulos meets this shady, Maltese professor known as Joseph Mifsud, who I think is probably the most interesting figure in this whole narrative. And that's saying something, because there's some real winners in this narrative," said McCarthy.

Also in this podcast, McCarthy explains how the collusion narrative was falling apart from a lack of evidence before it really even got started in the summer of 2016. But it was surprisingly revived by the hacking of DNC emails and Donald Trump's own behavior.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18941411Wed, 28 Aug 2019 20:50:08 +0000Radio AmericaIn the first two portions of our interview with "Ball of Collusion" author and former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy, he and Greg Corombos discuss the origins of the probe and why Special Counsel Robert Mueller waited two years to...In our new podcast, McCarthy details the meandering path of the supposed genesis of the investigation, including the various human sources used to incriminate Carter Page and George Papadopoulos. The operatives were later identified as figures such as Alexander Downer, Stefan Halper, and Joseph Mifsud.

"Papadopoulos meets this shady, Maltese professor known as Joseph Mifsud, who I think is probably the most interesting figure in this whole narrative. And that's saying something, because there's some real winners in this narrative," said McCarthy.

Also in this podcast, McCarthy explains how the collusion narrative was falling apart from a lack of evidence before it really even got started in the summer of 2016. But it was surprisingly revived by the hacking of DNC emails and Donald Trump's own behavior.]]>756news,conspiracy,trump,dnc,russia,donald,andrew,mccarthy,collusion,emails,2016cleanfullRadio AmericaIn the first two portions of our interview with "Ball of Collusion" author and former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy, he and Greg Corombos discuss the origins of the probe and why Special Counsel Robert Mueller waited two years to issue a report despite there being no evidence of conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
In our new podcast, McCarthy details the meandering path of the supposed genesis of the investigation, including the various human sources used to incriminate Carter Page and George Papadopoulos. The operatives were later identified as figures such as Alexander Downer, Stefan Halper, and Joseph Mifsud.
"Papadopoulos meets this shady, Maltese professor known as Joseph Mifsud, who I think is probably the most interesting figure in this whole narrative. And that's saying something, because there's some real winners in this narrative," said McCarthy.
Also in this podcast, McCarthy explains how the collusion narrative was falling apart from a lack of evidence before it really even got started in the summer of 2016. But it was surprisingly revived by the hacking of DNC emails and Donald Trump's own behavior.NoWhat Took So Long? - Ball of Collusion, Part 2https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/collusion2Now a contributing editor and columnist with National Review, McCarthy has tracked every step of of the Trump-Russia investigations. His new book is "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency."

In the first part of our conversation, McCarthy explained to Greg Corombos how the investigation really started, the role of then-CIA Director John Brennan, and how President Obama must have known and quite likely approved the investigation.

In the book, McCarthy says there is no evidence whatsoever of conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. If that's true, then why did the Mueller investigation take almost two years to complete?

"When you look at the indictments Mueller filed, it's quite clear not only that there wasn't a Trump-Russia conspiracy but that they affirmatively knew there wasn't a Trump-Russia conspiracy," said McCarthy.

Listen to the full podcast as McCarthy also offers a compelling case that Mueller and his team knew there was no conspiracy more than 18 months before releasing their report earlier this year.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18932318Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:30:08 +0000Radio AmericaAndrew C. McCarthy served as Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. He led the successful prosecution of the "Blind Sheikh," Omar Abdel Rahman, and his accomplices in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing...Now a contributing editor and columnist with National Review, McCarthy has tracked every step of of the Trump-Russia investigations. His new book is "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency."

In the first part of our conversation, McCarthy explained to Greg Corombos how the investigation really started, the role of then-CIA Director John Brennan, and how President Obama must have known and quite likely approved the investigation.

In the book, McCarthy says there is no evidence whatsoever of conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. If that's true, then why did the Mueller investigation take almost two years to complete?

"When you look at the indictments Mueller filed, it's quite clear not only that there wasn't a Trump-Russia conspiracy but that they affirmatively knew there wasn't a Trump-Russia conspiracy," said McCarthy.

Listen to the full podcast as McCarthy also offers a compelling case that Mueller and his team knew there was no conspiracy more than 18 months before releasing their report earlier this year.]]>506news,conspiracy,trump,russia,mccarthy,collusion,mueller,obstructioncleanfullRadio AmericaAndrew C. McCarthy served as Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. He led the successful prosecution of the "Blind Sheikh," Omar Abdel Rahman, and his accomplices in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and other plots to attack New York City landmarks.
Now a contributing editor and columnist with National Review, McCarthy has tracked every step of of the Trump-Russia investigations. His new book is "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency."
In the first part of our conversation, McCarthy explained to Greg Corombos how the investigation really started, the role of then-CIA Director John Brennan, and how President Obama must have known and quite likely approved the investigation.
In the book, McCarthy says there is no evidence whatsoever of conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. If that's true, then why did the Mueller investigation take almost two years to complete?
"When you look at the indictments Mueller filed, it's quite clear not only that there wasn't a Trump-Russia conspiracy but that they affirmatively knew there wasn't a Trump-Russia conspiracy," said McCarthy.
Listen to the full podcast as McCarthy also offers a compelling case that Mueller and his team knew there was no conspiracy more than 18 months before releasing their report earlier this year.NoHow the Trump-Russia Investigation Began - Ball of Collusion, Part 1https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/collusion1In this first installment, they discuss whether the initial investigation into allegations of a Trump-Russian conspiracy were based on concrete evidence or the desire to find something. They also examine the role of then-CIA Director John Brennan in the early stages of the probe.

Finally, McCarthy responds to critics who insist he is wrong to conclude President Obama knew about the investigation during the 2016 campaign, pointing out it would be far worse for the president NOT to know that a major party nominee was allegedly conspiring with a foreign adversary.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18921751Mon, 26 Aug 2019 21:00:17 +0000Radio AmericaFormer Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy joins Greg Corombos for an indepth conversation about McCarthy's new book, "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency."
In this first installment, they discuss...In this first installment, they discuss whether the initial investigation into allegations of a Trump-Russian conspiracy were based on concrete evidence or the desire to find something. They also examine the role of then-CIA Director John Brennan in the early stages of the probe.

Finally, McCarthy responds to critics who insist he is wrong to conclude President Obama knew about the investigation during the 2016 campaign, pointing out it would be far worse for the president NOT to know that a major party nominee was allegedly conspiring with a foreign adversary.]]>619news,obama,trump,campaign,brennan,russia,mccarthy,2016cleanfullRadio AmericaFormer Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy joins Greg Corombos for an indepth conversation about McCarthy's new book, "Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency."
In this first installment, they discuss whether the initial investigation into allegations of a Trump-Russian conspiracy were based on concrete evidence or the desire to find something. They also examine the role of then-CIA Director John Brennan in the early stages of the probe.
Finally, McCarthy responds to critics who insist he is wrong to conclude President Obama knew about the investigation during the 2016 campaign, pointing out it would be far worse for the president NOT to know that a major party nominee was allegedly conspiring with a foreign adversary.NoDebt Crisis 'Gonna Happen in the Next Couple Years'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/sanfordThere was virtually no reaction from the White House, Congress, or political figures of any stripe. The media also largely ignored the news.

Former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford is trying to sound the alarm about the debt crisis and is seriously considering a GOP presidential campaign to stress the issue since no other candidates are.

Sanford also spent separate three-term stints in the House of Representatives. He was defeated in the 2018 Republican primary after running afoul of President Trump and GOP leaders over government spending.

In discussing the latest CBO forecasts, Sanford began saying the mounting debt is simply a deferred tax on future generations who will have to pay the bills. Then he stopped himself and warned that the current generation could well face it too.

"This is not just a next generation problem. There is a proverbial straw that breaks a camel's back. We are growing ever closer to that moment.

"I believe we're walking toward the most predictable financial crisis in the history of man. It is not something that will happen to the next generation, but it's going to happen in the next couple of years," said Sanford.

"Think about this: we will spend more on interest (on the national debt) than we do on national defense in 36 months. That's not a kid or grandkid problem. That is our problem," said Sanford.

Sanford says he cannot pinpoint what will "light the match that lights the fire" or when exactly that might happen. However, current government estimates suggest Medicare will go insolvent in seven years and Social Security will follow suit in 15 years.

For his part, Sanford worries that increased tariffs will be a recipe for economic trouble. He says trillion dollar deficits are always alarming, particularly so in during a good economy.

"The deficits that we're running are being run in peacetime and relatively calm economic waters. You reverse the economic waters and the deficits explode," he said.

If the CBO projections are correct, the official national debt will stand at $34-35 trillion a decade from now. Sanford says the real numbers are far worse.

"The Congressional Budget Office numbers are not real. Those are fairly conservative numbers. This is why a variety of different organizations, like the Committee for a Responsible Federal Government have said those numbers could actually stretch closer to $2 trillion a year in operating deficits," said Sanford.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Sanford discuss why neither party is serious about reining in federal spending, what action he thinks needs to be taken to return to fiscal stability, and how he is deciding whether to run for president.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18901624Fri, 23 Aug 2019 22:38:58 +0000Radio AmericaThis past week, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected annual deficits in this and the next fiscal year will near $1 trillion and that the U.S. will rack up more than $12 trillion in debt over the next decade.
There was virtually no reaction...There was virtually no reaction from the White House, Congress, or political figures of any stripe. The media also largely ignored the news.

Former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford is trying to sound the alarm about the debt crisis and is seriously considering a GOP presidential campaign to stress the issue since no other candidates are.

Sanford also spent separate three-term stints in the House of Representatives. He was defeated in the 2018 Republican primary after running afoul of President Trump and GOP leaders over government spending.

In discussing the latest CBO forecasts, Sanford began saying the mounting debt is simply a deferred tax on future generations who will have to pay the bills. Then he stopped himself and warned that the current generation could well face it too.

"This is not just a next generation problem. There is a proverbial straw that breaks a camel's back. We are growing ever closer to that moment.

"I believe we're walking toward the most predictable financial crisis in the history of man. It is not something that will happen to the next generation, but it's going to happen in the next couple of years," said Sanford.

"Think about this: we will spend more on interest (on the national debt) than we do on national defense in 36 months. That's not a kid or grandkid problem. That is our problem," said Sanford.

Sanford says he cannot pinpoint what will "light the match that lights the fire" or when exactly that might happen. However, current government estimates suggest Medicare will go insolvent in seven years and Social Security will follow suit in 15 years.

For his part, Sanford worries that increased tariffs will be a recipe for economic trouble. He says trillion dollar deficits are always alarming, particularly so in during a good economy.

"The deficits that we're running are being run in peacetime and relatively calm economic waters. You reverse the economic waters and the deficits explode," he said.

If the CBO projections are correct, the official national debt will stand at $34-35 trillion a decade from now. Sanford says the real numbers are far worse.

"The Congressional Budget Office numbers are not real. Those are fairly conservative numbers. This is why a variety of different organizations, like the Committee for a Responsible Federal Government have said those numbers could actually stretch closer to $2 trillion a year in operating deficits," said Sanford.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Sanford discuss why neither party is serious about reining in federal spending, what action he thinks needs to be taken to return to fiscal stability, and how he is deciding whether to run for president.]]>801news,crisis,taxes,trump,deficit,debt,2020,entitlements,sanfordcleanfullRadio AmericaThis past week, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected annual deficits in this and the next fiscal year will near $1 trillion and that the U.S. will rack up more than $12 trillion in debt over the next decade.
There was virtually no reaction from the White House, Congress, or political figures of any stripe. The media also largely ignored the news.
Former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford is trying to sound the alarm about the debt crisis and is seriously considering a GOP presidential campaign to stress the issue since no other candidates are.
Sanford also spent separate three-term stints in the House of Representatives. He was defeated in the 2018 Republican primary after running afoul of President Trump and GOP leaders over government spending.
In discussing the latest CBO forecasts, Sanford began saying the mounting debt is simply a deferred tax on future generations who will have to pay the bills. Then he stopped himself and warned that the current generation could well face it too.
"This is not just a next generation problem. There is a proverbial straw that breaks a camel's back. We are growing ever closer to that moment.
"I believe we're walking toward the most predictable financial crisis in the history of man. It is not something that will happen to the next generation, but it's going to happen in the next couple of years," said Sanford.
"Think about this: we will spend more on interest (on the national debt) than we do on national defense in 36 months. That's not a kid or grandkid problem. That is our problem," said Sanford.
Sanford says he cannot pinpoint what will "light the match that lights the fire" or when exactly that might happen. However, current government estimates suggest Medicare will go insolvent in seven years and Social Security will follow suit in 15 years.
For his part, Sanford worries that increased tariffs will be a recipe for economic trouble. He says trillion dollar deficits are always alarming, particularly so in during a good economy.
"The deficits that we're running are being run in peacetime and relatively calm economic waters. You reverse the economic waters and the deficits explode," he said.
If the CBO projections are correct, the official national debt will stand at $34-35 trillion a decade from now. Sanford says the real numbers are far worse.
"The Congressional Budget Office numbers are not real. Those are fairly conservative numbers. This is why a variety of different organizations, like the Committee for a Responsible Federal Government have said those numbers could actually stretch closer to $2 trillion a year in operating deficits," said Sanford.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Sanford discuss why neither party is serious about reining in federal spending, what action he thinks needs to be taken to return to fiscal stability, and how he is deciding whether to run for president.NoEx-Immigration Judge: New Policy 'Most Humanitarian Decision That Could Be Made'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/arthur_3Critics plan to challenge the new policy, with Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley calling it "large-scale imprisonment" and likening the approach to the internment camps for Americans of Japanese descent during World War II.

Since 1997, the U.S. has held to a policy established in a court settlement that children cannot be detained for more than 20 days, even while their parents wait to have their cases decided. That policy has been revised over the years.

The policy was challenged in 2014, when accompanied and unaccompanied minors came to the U.S. in large numbers. Then-Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson ordered the construction of the temporary shelters that are now a flashpoint. When challenged in court, a federal judge ruled that minors - whether with their parents or not - could only be held for 20 days.

In June 2018, President Trump signed an executive order ending family separation, meaning adults were only held for 20 days as well.

In recent months, the number of migrants flooding the U.S.-Mexico border has swelled to more than 100,000 late in the spring of this year.

Former Clinton Justice Department official and former immigration judge Andrew Arthur says this new policy is not only the best approach for the sake of national security but for the well-being of the migrants themselves.

"This is the most humanitarian decision that could be made. The number of people who attempt to undertake this journey is going to fall if they simply can't be released into the United States. In fact, they'll go back to the historical numbers we used to see of a few hundred of these families showing up at the border every month," said Arthur.

Arthur cites a bipartisan report showing that two-thirds of people smuggled into the U.S. suffer physical harm and one-third of women are sexually assaulted. He says once potential migrants know they won't be released, they'll avoid the horrors of the trip to the border.

"It's going to remove the incentive for parents to use their children as pawns and for smugglers to use children as pawns in order to get individuals seeking economic advancement into the United States, where they can work illegally," said Arthur.

Listen to the full podcast as Arthur explains the full background of the child detention policy, why immigration cases are usually resolved in a couple months rather than years, what the few alternatives to the revisions actually are, and why detention centers are actually the safest place for migrants to be while their cases are dealt with.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18892366Thu, 22 Aug 2019 21:40:23 +0000Radio AmericaThe Trump administration is planning to implement a new rule that keeps migrant families together but keeps them in custody until their immigration status is decided.
Critics plan to challenge the new policy, with Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley calling...Critics plan to challenge the new policy, with Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley calling it "large-scale imprisonment" and likening the approach to the internment camps for Americans of Japanese descent during World War II.

Since 1997, the U.S. has held to a policy established in a court settlement that children cannot be detained for more than 20 days, even while their parents wait to have their cases decided. That policy has been revised over the years.

The policy was challenged in 2014, when accompanied and unaccompanied minors came to the U.S. in large numbers. Then-Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson ordered the construction of the temporary shelters that are now a flashpoint. When challenged in court, a federal judge ruled that minors - whether with their parents or not - could only be held for 20 days.

In June 2018, President Trump signed an executive order ending family separation, meaning adults were only held for 20 days as well.

In recent months, the number of migrants flooding the U.S.-Mexico border has swelled to more than 100,000 late in the spring of this year.

Former Clinton Justice Department official and former immigration judge Andrew Arthur says this new policy is not only the best approach for the sake of national security but for the well-being of the migrants themselves.

"This is the most humanitarian decision that could be made. The number of people who attempt to undertake this journey is going to fall if they simply can't be released into the United States. In fact, they'll go back to the historical numbers we used to see of a few hundred of these families showing up at the border every month," said Arthur.

Arthur cites a bipartisan report showing that two-thirds of people smuggled into the U.S. suffer physical harm and one-third of women are sexually assaulted. He says once potential migrants know they won't be released, they'll avoid the horrors of the trip to the border.

"It's going to remove the incentive for parents to use their children as pawns and for smugglers to use children as pawns in order to get individuals seeking economic advancement into the United States, where they can work illegally," said Arthur.

Listen to the full podcast as Arthur explains the full background of the child detention policy, why immigration cases are usually resolved in a couple months rather than years, what the few alternatives to the revisions actually are, and why detention centers are actually the safest place for migrants to be while their cases are dealt with.]]>788news,trump,immigration,asylum,detention,smugglerscleanfullRadio AmericaThe Trump administration is planning to implement a new rule that keeps migrant families together but keeps them in custody until their immigration status is decided.
Critics plan to challenge the new policy, with Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley calling it "large-scale imprisonment" and likening the approach to the internment camps for Americans of Japanese descent during World War II.
Since 1997, the U.S. has held to a policy established in a court settlement that children cannot be detained for more than 20 days, even while their parents wait to have their cases decided. That policy has been revised over the years.
The policy was challenged in 2014, when accompanied and unaccompanied minors came to the U.S. in large numbers. Then-Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson ordered the construction of the temporary shelters that are now a flashpoint. When challenged in court, a federal judge ruled that minors - whether with their parents or not - could only be held for 20 days.
In June 2018, President Trump signed an executive order ending family separation, meaning adults were only held for 20 days as well.
In recent months, the number of migrants flooding the U.S.-Mexico border has swelled to more than 100,000 late in the spring of this year.
Former Clinton Justice Department official and former immigration judge Andrew Arthur says this new policy is not only the best approach for the sake of national security but for the well-being of the migrants themselves.
"This is the most humanitarian decision that could be made. The number of people who attempt to undertake this journey is going to fall if they simply can't be released into the United States. In fact, they'll go back to the historical numbers we used to see of a few hundred of these families showing up at the border every month," said Arthur.
Arthur cites a bipartisan report showing that two-thirds of people smuggled into the U.S. suffer physical harm and one-third of women are sexually assaulted. He says once potential migrants know they won't be released, they'll avoid the horrors of the trip to the border.
"It's going to remove the incentive for parents to use their children as pawns and for smugglers to use children as pawns in order to get individuals seeking economic advancement into the United States, where they can work illegally," said Arthur.
Listen to the full podcast as Arthur explains the full background of the child detention policy, why immigration cases are usually resolved in a couple months rather than years, what the few alternatives to the revisions actually are, and why detention centers are actually the safest place for migrants to be while their cases are dealt with.NoWhat Trump Is Changing in the Endangered Species Acthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/cohen_1But a leading conservative environmental policy analyst says the changes amount to nothing more than common sense, and in some instances return the law to its 1973 origins.

So what actually changed? National Center for Public Policy Research Senior Fellow Dr. Bonner Cohen says the revisions change nothing where endangered species live.

"The Endangered Species Act mandates that critical habitat be set aside for the species' recovery The Trump administration reforms say, 'Yes, you can designate critical habitat, but that must be habitat where a species really exists, not potential habitat.

"That distinction is very important, because it limits the amount of land that the Department of the Interior's Fish & Wildlife Service can regulate. And these regulations can be very strict. The ESA has sadly become a land use restriction mechanism," said Cohen.

In one instance, the government ordered more than 1,500 acres declared critical habitat for the Dusky Gopher Frog in St. Tammany Parish in Louisiana. However, Cohen says there are no known Dusky Gopher Frogs in Louisiana, yet the land was off limits for development. He says the ESA is often used to stifle rural development, particularly in the western United States.

Another change would revert the Endangered Species Act to have a distinct difference between "endangered" and "threatened" species. Cohen says the government has blurred the line over the past two decades and "threatened" species get the same amount of protection despite being in a better position to survive without federal intervention.

Nonetheless, activists are slamming the president for the revisions to the Endangered Species Act.

"There has never been a presidential administration more willfully, more purposefully negligent when it comes to the stewardship of our natural resources than the Trump administration," said conservationist Jeff Corwin on MSNBC.Cohen is neither surprised nor fazed by the blowback.

"Their reaction is completely predictable because these are the people who have been working hand in glove with federal officials over decades to get species added to the list, not for the purpose of saving those species but for the purpose of shutting down as much activity on rural land across America as possible," said Cohen.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Cohen explain why the Endangered Species Act is a colossal failure even by government standards, noting that only 40 of 1,661 species have ever been taken off the endangered list and 20 of those were already extinct or didn't belong on the list to begin with. He also explains why Americans who care for their land end up the biggest losers under the ESA.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18881061Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:03:15 +0000Radio AmericaEnvironmental activists and political opponents are furious with President Trump for revising the Endangered Species Act (ESA), accusing him of being "purposefully" and "willfully negligent" with our natural resources.
But a leading conservative...But a leading conservative environmental policy analyst says the changes amount to nothing more than common sense, and in some instances return the law to its 1973 origins.

So what actually changed? National Center for Public Policy Research Senior Fellow Dr. Bonner Cohen says the revisions change nothing where endangered species live.

"The Endangered Species Act mandates that critical habitat be set aside for the species' recovery The Trump administration reforms say, 'Yes, you can designate critical habitat, but that must be habitat where a species really exists, not potential habitat.

"That distinction is very important, because it limits the amount of land that the Department of the Interior's Fish & Wildlife Service can regulate. And these regulations can be very strict. The ESA has sadly become a land use restriction mechanism," said Cohen.

In one instance, the government ordered more than 1,500 acres declared critical habitat for the Dusky Gopher Frog in St. Tammany Parish in Louisiana. However, Cohen says there are no known Dusky Gopher Frogs in Louisiana, yet the land was off limits for development. He says the ESA is often used to stifle rural development, particularly in the western United States.

Another change would revert the Endangered Species Act to have a distinct difference between "endangered" and "threatened" species. Cohen says the government has blurred the line over the past two decades and "threatened" species get the same amount of protection despite being in a better position to survive without federal intervention.

Nonetheless, activists are slamming the president for the revisions to the Endangered Species Act.

"There has never been a presidential administration more willfully, more purposefully negligent when it comes to the stewardship of our natural resources than the Trump administration," said conservationist Jeff Corwin on MSNBC.Cohen is neither surprised nor fazed by the blowback.

"Their reaction is completely predictable because these are the people who have been working hand in glove with federal officials over decades to get species added to the list, not for the purpose of saving those species but for the purpose of shutting down as much activity on rural land across America as possible," said Cohen.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Cohen explain why the Endangered Species Act is a colossal failure even by government standards, noting that only 40 of 1,661 species have ever been taken off the endangered list and 20 of those were already extinct or didn't belong on the list to begin with. He also explains why Americans who care for their land end up the biggest losers under the ESA.]]>751trump,president,act,species,environmentalists,endangered,revisionscleanfullRadio AmericaEnvironmental activists and political opponents are furious with President Trump for revising the Endangered Species Act (ESA), accusing him of being "purposefully" and "willfully negligent" with our natural resources.
But a leading conservative environmental policy analyst says the changes amount to nothing more than common sense, and in some instances return the law to its 1973 origins.
So what actually changed? National Center for Public Policy Research Senior Fellow Dr. Bonner Cohen says the revisions change nothing where endangered species live.
"The Endangered Species Act mandates that critical habitat be set aside for the species' recovery The Trump administration reforms say, 'Yes, you can designate critical habitat, but that must be habitat where a species really exists, not potential habitat.
"That distinction is very important, because it limits the amount of land that the Department of the Interior's Fish & Wildlife Service can regulate. And these regulations can be very strict. The ESA has sadly become a land use restriction mechanism," said Cohen.
In one instance, the government ordered more than 1,500 acres declared critical habitat for the Dusky Gopher Frog in St. Tammany Parish in Louisiana. However, Cohen says there are no known Dusky Gopher Frogs in Louisiana, yet the land was off limits for development. He says the ESA is often used to stifle rural development, particularly in the western United States.
Another change would revert the Endangered Species Act to have a distinct difference between "endangered" and "threatened" species. Cohen says the government has blurred the line over the past two decades and "threatened" species get the same amount of protection despite being in a better position to survive without federal intervention.
Nonetheless, activists are slamming the president for the revisions to the Endangered Species Act.
"There has never been a presidential administration more willfully, more purposefully negligent when it comes to the stewardship of our natural resources than the Trump administration,"
said conservationist Jeff Corwin on MSNBC.
Cohen is neither surprised nor fazed by the blowback.
"Their reaction is completely predictable because these are the people who have been working hand in glove with federal officials over decades to get species added to the list, not for the purpose of saving those species but for the purpose of shutting down as much activity on rural land across America as possible," said Cohen.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Cohen explain why the Endangered Species Act is a colossal failure even by government standards, noting that only 40 of 1,661 species have ever been taken off the endangered list and 20 of those were already extinct or didn't belong on the list to begin with. He also explains why Americans who care for their land end up the biggest losers under the ESA.No'Planned Parenthood Has Really Shown Its True Colors'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/quigley_2Susan B. Anthony List Vice President of Communications Mallory Quigley says this is a big win for the pro-life cause.

"Planned Parenthood is choosing to not comply with the rule, which is really intended to draw a bright line of separation between the idea of family planning and separation versus abortion," said Quigley.

She also says Planned Parenthood may not have spent previous Title X funds directly on abortion but did use it to buy pro-abortion advertising in addition to paying bills that helped keep the nation's largest abortion provider open.

Planned Parenthood is losing about $60 million in taxpayer funds as a result, although it is still getting the bulk of the roughly $500 million in total federal funding it gets every year.

Acting Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson says the lack of funding will make it harder for women to seek health care and some may forego it altogether.

Quigley wonders why an organization so flush with other money that it spends lavishly on political campaigns won't make women's health care a priority.

"Planned Parenthood has really shown its true colors by prioritizing abortion over family planning and refusing to comply with this rule," said Quigley.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Quigley explain why the new rule does not constitute an infringement on the freedom of speech for Planned Parenthood personnel, where the abortion fight goes from here, and how this news shows just how big of a difference elections make.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18868662Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:07:01 +0000Radio AmericaOn Monday, Planned Parenthood withdrew its application to be a recipient of Title X federal health care funding, following a Trump administration rule change barring recipients from encouraging patients to pursue abortions.
Susan B. Anthony List Vice...Susan B. Anthony List Vice President of Communications Mallory Quigley says this is a big win for the pro-life cause.

"Planned Parenthood is choosing to not comply with the rule, which is really intended to draw a bright line of separation between the idea of family planning and separation versus abortion," said Quigley.

She also says Planned Parenthood may not have spent previous Title X funds directly on abortion but did use it to buy pro-abortion advertising in addition to paying bills that helped keep the nation's largest abortion provider open.

Planned Parenthood is losing about $60 million in taxpayer funds as a result, although it is still getting the bulk of the roughly $500 million in total federal funding it gets every year.

Acting Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson says the lack of funding will make it harder for women to seek health care and some may forego it altogether.

Quigley wonders why an organization so flush with other money that it spends lavishly on political campaigns won't make women's health care a priority.

"Planned Parenthood has really shown its true colors by prioritizing abortion over family planning and refusing to comply with this rule," said Quigley.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Quigley explain why the new rule does not constitute an infringement on the freedom of speech for Planned Parenthood personnel, where the abortion fight goes from here, and how this news shows just how big of a difference elections make.]]>873trump,elections,courts,speech,abortion,hhscleanfullRadio AmericaOn Monday, Planned Parenthood withdrew its application to be a recipient of Title X federal health care funding, following a Trump administration rule change barring recipients from encouraging patients to pursue abortions.
Susan B. Anthony List Vice President of Communications Mallory Quigley says this is a big win for the pro-life cause.
"Planned Parenthood is choosing to not comply with the rule, which is really intended to draw a bright line of separation between the idea of family planning and separation versus abortion," said Quigley.
She also says Planned Parenthood may not have spent previous Title X funds directly on abortion but did use it to buy pro-abortion advertising in addition to paying bills that helped keep the nation's largest abortion provider open.
Planned Parenthood is losing about $60 million in taxpayer funds as a result, although it is still getting the bulk of the roughly $500 million in total federal funding it gets every year.
Acting Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson says the lack of funding will make it harder for women to seek health care and some may forego it altogether.
Quigley wonders why an organization so flush with other money that it spends lavishly on political campaigns won't make women's health care a priority.
"Planned Parenthood has really shown its true colors by prioritizing abortion over family planning and refusing to comply with this rule," said Quigley.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Quigley explain why the new rule does not constitute an infringement on the freedom of speech for Planned Parenthood personnel, where the abortion fight goes from here, and how this news shows just how big of a difference elections make.NoHong Kong Protests: 'This Is Their Last Stand for Autonomy'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/chang_3A leading expert on China policy says the showdown is critically important and that President Trump must do much more to support those demanding their freedom.

The demonstrations began in June in fierce opposition to a proposed law in the Hong Kong legislature that would make extradition to mainland China much easier. With more than a million people in the streets, officials shelved the legislation. But protesters want it permanently withdrawn and more power in determining their government among other demands.

"People in Hong Kong, and not just the pro-democracy kids on the streets but also a very large segment of the Hong Kong population, just believe this is their last stand for autonomy," said Gordon Chang, a China expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China."

Peaceful protests have turned more confrontational lately, both in the streets and this week at an airport sit-in. Chang admits some of the demonstrators have gotten more rowdy but he sees something out of place with the Hong Kong police as well.

Chang says YouTube videos show supposed Hong Kong police officers unable to speak the native Cantonese language or present their police identification. Another shows an officer oddly addressing fellow officers as "comrades" and another showing an officer alternately speaking Cantonese and Mandarin, which is highly unusual he says.

And as China appears to be taking a hard line on the protesters, President Trump appears to be going very soft on China, at least for now.

"The Hong Kong thing is a very tough situation, very tough. We'll what see what happens. But I'm sure it'll work out. I hope it works out for everybody, including China, by the way," said Trump on Tuesday.

"He's also said things like, 'This is a matter between Hong Kong and China.' That is uninspiring and completely inadequate," said Chang.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Chang discuss how China is likely to act as the protests continue, why he believes this crisis matters a lot to the United States, and what the proper U.S. position should be right now.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18819860Wed, 14 Aug 2019 22:24:15 +0000Radio AmericaTensions in Hong Kong remain very high as huge numbers of residents there continue pro-democracy protests aimed at keeping the communist Chinese regime at arm's length and forces loyal to the Chinese government take stronger action to put down the...A leading expert on China policy says the showdown is critically important and that President Trump must do much more to support those demanding their freedom.

The demonstrations began in June in fierce opposition to a proposed law in the Hong Kong legislature that would make extradition to mainland China much easier. With more than a million people in the streets, officials shelved the legislation. But protesters want it permanently withdrawn and more power in determining their government among other demands.

"People in Hong Kong, and not just the pro-democracy kids on the streets but also a very large segment of the Hong Kong population, just believe this is their last stand for autonomy," said Gordon Chang, a China expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China."

Peaceful protests have turned more confrontational lately, both in the streets and this week at an airport sit-in. Chang admits some of the demonstrators have gotten more rowdy but he sees something out of place with the Hong Kong police as well.

Chang says YouTube videos show supposed Hong Kong police officers unable to speak the native Cantonese language or present their police identification. Another shows an officer oddly addressing fellow officers as "comrades" and another showing an officer alternately speaking Cantonese and Mandarin, which is highly unusual he says.

And as China appears to be taking a hard line on the protesters, President Trump appears to be going very soft on China, at least for now.

"The Hong Kong thing is a very tough situation, very tough. We'll what see what happens. But I'm sure it'll work out. I hope it works out for everybody, including China, by the way," said Trump on Tuesday.

"He's also said things like, 'This is a matter between Hong Kong and China.' That is uninspiring and completely inadequate," said Chang.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Chang discuss how China is likely to act as the protests continue, why he believes this crisis matters a lot to the United States, and what the proper U.S. position should be right now.]]>684news,trump,china,freedom,protests,hongkongcleanfullRadio AmericaTensions in Hong Kong remain very high as huge numbers of residents there continue pro-democracy protests aimed at keeping the communist Chinese regime at arm's length and forces loyal to the Chinese government take stronger action to put down the protests.
A leading expert on China policy says the showdown is critically important and that President Trump must do much more to support those demanding their freedom.
The demonstrations began in June in fierce opposition to a proposed law in the Hong Kong legislature that would make extradition to mainland China much easier. With more than a million people in the streets, officials shelved the legislation. But protesters want it permanently withdrawn and more power in determining their government among other demands.
"People in Hong Kong, and not just the pro-democracy kids on the streets but also a very large segment of the Hong Kong population, just believe this is their last stand for autonomy," said Gordon Chang, a China expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China."
Peaceful protests have turned more confrontational lately, both in the streets and this week at an airport sit-in. Chang admits some of the demonstrators have gotten more rowdy but he sees something out of place with the Hong Kong police as well.
"I don't think they're answering to the Hong Kong commissioner of police. I think that essentially we're seeing Beijing dictate what's going on," said Chang.
Chang says YouTube videos show supposed Hong Kong police officers unable to speak the native Cantonese language or present their police identification. Another shows an officer oddly addressing fellow officers as "comrades" and another showing an officer alternately speaking Cantonese and Mandarin, which is highly unusual he says.
And as China appears to be taking a hard line on the protesters, President Trump appears to be going very soft on China, at least for now.
"The Hong Kong thing is a very tough situation, very tough. We'll what see what happens. But I'm sure it'll work out. I hope it works out for everybody, including China, by the way," said Trump on Tuesday.
"He's also said things like, 'This is a matter between Hong Kong and China.' That is uninspiring and completely inadequate," said Chang.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Chang discuss how China is likely to act as the protests continue, why he believes this crisis matters a lot to the United States, and what the proper U.S. position should be right now.NoTracking Your Tax Dollarshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/adam_3OpentheBooks.com recently studied where nearly $170 billion from the Small Business Administration went over a five-year span.

In this podcast, OpentheBooks CEO Adam Andrzejewski details the questionable recipients of much of this money and how little of it went to mom and pop business owners struggling to survive. But he also discusses one way in which the federal government is starting to crack down on spending.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18810971Tue, 13 Aug 2019 23:39:19 +0000Radio AmericaOver the first ten months of Fiscal Year 2019, the United States is running it's largest deficit in history. Fiscal restraint was laughed out of Washington by both parties a long time ago, but what exactly is happening with your tax dollars?...OpentheBooks.com recently studied where nearly $170 billion from the Small Business Administration went over a five-year span.

In this podcast, OpentheBooks CEO Adam Andrzejewski details the questionable recipients of much of this money and how little of it went to mom and pop business owners struggling to survive. But he also discusses one way in which the federal government is starting to crack down on spending.]]>554news,government,spending,sba,businesses,deficitscleanfullRadio AmericaOver the first ten months of Fiscal Year 2019, the United States is running it's largest deficit in history. Fiscal restraint was laughed out of Washington by both parties a long time ago, but what exactly is happening with your tax dollars?
OpentheBooks.com recently studied where nearly $170 billion from the Small Business Administration went over a five-year span.
In this podcast, OpentheBooks CEO Adam Andrzejewski details the questionable recipients of much of this money and how little of it went to mom and pop business owners struggling to survive. But he also discusses one way in which the federal government is starting to crack down on spending.NoAG Barr Vows Epstein Investigation Will Continuehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/epsteinhttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18810145Tue, 13 Aug 2019 21:39:43 +0000Radio AmericaJeffrey Epstein's suicide on Saturday continues to spark questions and conspiracies. Attorney General Bill Barr will continue the probe into his death and crimes. Julie Mitchell reports.194news,politics,podcastscleanfullRadio AmericaJeffrey Epstein's suicide on Saturday continues to spark questions and conspiracies. Attorney General Bill Barr will continue the probe into his death and crimes. Julie Mitchell reports.NoRed Flag Laws: Reasonable Safeguards or Infringing Rights?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_9Red flag laws would allow a court to assess whether a person is a threat to themselves or others, remove the guns if the person is deemed a threat, and then re-evaluate their case at various intervals.

Supporters say red flag laws are the best way to preserve second amendment rights while taking steps to prevent mass shootings or other violence.

Detractors see the idea as a a slippery slope that would allow Americans to be harassed by such laws due to their political beliefs or simply because someone doesn't like them. They also fear due process would be comprised for those accused.

Listen to the full podcast as McCarthy responds to those objections and much more. He describes the kind of laws he would like to see, why he thinks it would clearly be constitutional, and what kind of poison pills conservatives would need to avoid in getting the legislation over the finish line.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18779491Fri, 09 Aug 2019 21:47:14 +0000Radio AmericaFormer Chief Asst. U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy says second amendment defenders ought to get behind so-called red flag laws so long as the legislation is written responsibly.
Red flag laws would allow a court to assess whether a person is a...Red flag laws would allow a court to assess whether a person is a threat to themselves or others, remove the guns if the person is deemed a threat, and then re-evaluate their case at various intervals.

Supporters say red flag laws are the best way to preserve second amendment rights while taking steps to prevent mass shootings or other violence.

Detractors see the idea as a a slippery slope that would allow Americans to be harassed by such laws due to their political beliefs or simply because someone doesn't like them. They also fear due process would be comprised for those accused.

Listen to the full podcast as McCarthy responds to those objections and much more. He describes the kind of laws he would like to see, why he thinks it would clearly be constitutional, and what kind of poison pills conservatives would need to avoid in getting the legislation over the finish line.]]>1085cleanfullRadio AmericaFormer Chief Asst. U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy says second amendment defenders ought to get behind so-called red flag laws so long as the legislation is written responsibly.
Red flag laws would allow a court to assess whether a person is a threat to themselves or others, remove the guns if the person is deemed a threat, and then re-evaluate their case at various intervals.
Supporters say red flag laws are the best way to preserve second amendment rights while taking steps to prevent mass shootings or other violence.
Detractors see the idea as a a slippery slope that would allow Americans to be harassed by such laws due to their political beliefs or simply because someone doesn't like them. They also fear due process would be comprised for those accused.
Listen to the full podcast as McCarthy responds to those objections and much more. He describes the kind of laws he would like to see, why he thinks it would clearly be constitutional, and what kind of poison pills conservatives would need to avoid in getting the legislation over the finish line.NoGun Owners Explain Opposition to Gun Control Agendahttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hammond_3But while you might not know it from watching and reading mainstream media sources, there is another side of this debate. Second amendment groups like Gun Owners of America are pushing back vigorously across the board, starting with the push for the Senate to take up the House bill on universal background checks.

Gun Owners of America Legislative Counsel Mike Hammond says the House bill infringes far more on personal liberties than its supporters would have Americans believe.

"The legislation which the House passed is completely screwy. It's a trap which could basically enmesh any gun owner," said Hammond.

He says the most innocuous activity could make you a hardened criminal under the House bill.

"If you show your gun to your neighbor in your dining room and then go into the next room to go to the bathroom, you're a felon. If you sell your gun to your kid for one dollar, you're a felon. If you take someone shooting and the person doesn't have a hunting license, you're a felon.

"The bill has a whole lot of deliberate provisions in it to make if very, very difficult to own a firearm in America," said Hammond.

President Trump has not indicated support for that particular bill but he has said in recent days that he is open to expanded background checks. Hammond says it's hard to read Trump's commitment to the second amendment moment to moment, but hopes the president will not go down that road.

"Depending on who's in the room, he's either pro or anti-second amendment. I hope that he holds firm because if he basically kisses off the second amendment community, I think he's going to be a one-term president," said Hammond.

Listen to the full podcast to learn what Hammond think about requiring a background check for every firearm purchase or proposed red flag laws which would allow guns to be removed from Americans reported as a danger to themselves or others. And we ask whether the Senate is likely to take up any of these issues.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18767415Thu, 08 Aug 2019 21:44:06 +0000Radio AmericaIn wake of three horrific mass shootings, demands for gun control legislation are intensifying. Supporters of the movement insist universal background checks, assault weapons ban, red flag laws, and other measures will reduce the odds for more...But while you might not know it from watching and reading mainstream media sources, there is another side of this debate. Second amendment groups like Gun Owners of America are pushing back vigorously across the board, starting with the push for the Senate to take up the House bill on universal background checks.

Gun Owners of America Legislative Counsel Mike Hammond says the House bill infringes far more on personal liberties than its supporters would have Americans believe.

"The legislation which the House passed is completely screwy. It's a trap which could basically enmesh any gun owner," said Hammond.

He says the most innocuous activity could make you a hardened criminal under the House bill.

"If you show your gun to your neighbor in your dining room and then go into the next room to go to the bathroom, you're a felon. If you sell your gun to your kid for one dollar, you're a felon. If you take someone shooting and the person doesn't have a hunting license, you're a felon.

"The bill has a whole lot of deliberate provisions in it to make if very, very difficult to own a firearm in America," said Hammond.

President Trump has not indicated support for that particular bill but he has said in recent days that he is open to expanded background checks. Hammond says it's hard to read Trump's commitment to the second amendment moment to moment, but hopes the president will not go down that road.

"Depending on who's in the room, he's either pro or anti-second amendment. I hope that he holds firm because if he basically kisses off the second amendment community, I think he's going to be a one-term president," said Hammond.

Listen to the full podcast to learn what Hammond think about requiring a background check for every firearm purchase or proposed red flag laws which would allow guns to be removed from Americans reported as a danger to themselves or others. And we ask whether the Senate is likely to take up any of these issues.]]>786news,guns,control,gun,red,shootings,background,solutions,flagscleanfullRadio AmericaIn wake of three horrific mass shootings, demands for gun control legislation are intensifying. Supporters of the movement insist universal background checks, assault weapons ban, red flag laws, and other measures will reduce the odds for more atrocities like we witnessed over the weekend in El Paso and Dayton.
But while you might not know it from watching and reading mainstream media sources, there is another side of this debate. Second amendment groups like Gun Owners of America are pushing back vigorously across the board, starting with the push for the Senate to take up the House bill on universal background checks.
Gun Owners of America Legislative Counsel Mike Hammond says the House bill infringes far more on personal liberties than its supporters would have Americans believe.
"The legislation which the House passed is completely screwy. It's a trap which could basically enmesh any gun owner," said Hammond.
He says the most innocuous activity could make you a hardened criminal under the House bill.
"If you show your gun to your neighbor in your dining room and then go into the next room to go to the bathroom, you're a felon. If you sell your gun to your kid for one dollar, you're a felon. If you take someone shooting and the person doesn't have a hunting license, you're a felon.
"The bill has a whole lot of deliberate provisions in it to make if very, very difficult to own a firearm in America," said Hammond.
President Trump has not indicated support for that particular bill but he has said in recent days that he is open to expanded background checks. Hammond says it's hard to read Trump's commitment to the second amendment moment to moment, but hopes the president will not go down that road.
"Depending on who's in the room, he's either pro or anti-second amendment. I hope that he holds firm because if he basically kisses off the second amendment community, I think he's going to be a one-term president," said Hammond.
Listen to the full podcast to learn what Hammond think about requiring a background check for every firearm purchase or proposed red flag laws which would allow guns to be removed from Americans reported as a danger to themselves or others. And we ask whether the Senate is likely to take up any of these issues.NoMcCarthy Sizes Up Mueller Testimonyhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_8Democrats clearly tried to assert that Mueller would have indicted President Trump for obstruction of justice of Justice Department policy did not forbid the indictment of a sitting president. Republicans were determined to point out that the scope of the Mueller investigation was too narrow and ought to include an examination how how the surveillance of Trump campaign officials began in the first place.

What no one expected was the Mueller performance. The former FBI director appeared to lack a strong command of his investigation and even admitted he did not oversee it on a day-to-day basis. He often searched for answers in a manner that shocked analysts on both sides of the aisle.

But what is the impact of Mueller's testimony? Did Democrats make the case that Trump only avoided prosecution because of a loophole? Did Republicans succeed in showing that a much broader investigation is warranted? Why is Mueller's shaky performance a big deal? What is the next big step in this saga? And is either side worried about ongoing Russian efforts to meddle in elections?

We discuss all of these questions and more in our conversation with former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy, now a contributing editor and columnist at National Review Online and a contributor for the Fox New Channel.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18633838Wed, 24 Jul 2019 22:26:07 +0000Radio AmericaFormer Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III offered his highly anticipated testimony on Wednesday, but the day turned out differently than Democrats or Republicans anticipated.
Democrats clearly tried to assert that Mueller would have indicted...Democrats clearly tried to assert that Mueller would have indicted President Trump for obstruction of justice of Justice Department policy did not forbid the indictment of a sitting president. Republicans were determined to point out that the scope of the Mueller investigation was too narrow and ought to include an examination how how the surveillance of Trump campaign officials began in the first place.

What no one expected was the Mueller performance. The former FBI director appeared to lack a strong command of his investigation and even admitted he did not oversee it on a day-to-day basis. He often searched for answers in a manner that shocked analysts on both sides of the aisle.

But what is the impact of Mueller's testimony? Did Democrats make the case that Trump only avoided prosecution because of a loophole? Did Republicans succeed in showing that a much broader investigation is warranted? Why is Mueller's shaky performance a big deal? What is the next big step in this saga? And is either side worried about ongoing Russian efforts to meddle in elections?

We discuss all of these questions and more in our conversation with former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy, now a contributing editor and columnist at National Review Online and a contributor for the Fox New Channel.]]>1002news,trump,elections,russia,mccarthy,collusion,2016,mueller,obstructioncleanfullRadio AmericaFormer Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III offered his highly anticipated testimony on Wednesday, but the day turned out differently than Democrats or Republicans anticipated.
Democrats clearly tried to assert that Mueller would have indicted President Trump for obstruction of justice of Justice Department policy did not forbid the indictment of a sitting president. Republicans were determined to point out that the scope of the Mueller investigation was too narrow and ought to include an examination how how the surveillance of Trump campaign officials began in the first place.
What no one expected was the Mueller performance. The former FBI director appeared to lack a strong command of his investigation and even admitted he did not oversee it on a day-to-day basis. He often searched for answers in a manner that shocked analysts on both sides of the aisle.
But what is the impact of Mueller's testimony? Did Democrats make the case that Trump only avoided prosecution because of a loophole? Did Republicans succeed in showing that a much broader investigation is warranted? Why is Mueller's shaky performance a big deal? What is the next big step in this saga? And is either side worried about ongoing Russian efforts to meddle in elections?
We discuss all of these questions and more in our conversation with former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy, now a contributing editor and columnist at National Review Online and a contributor for the Fox New Channel.NoNew Budget Deal Means Even More Debthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/sepp_8According to reports, the agreement runs through July 31, 2021. It would effectively end all remaining elements of the 2011 Budget Control Act known as sequester, while adding $350 billion in new spending in exchange for about $75 billion in offsets.

If that seems lopsided in favor of more spending, that's because it is. But National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp says it's even worse than it looks.

"The things is there are ripple effects past two years. If you do a decade-long total, you're talking about something closer to $2 trillion of additional spending permitted by this deal," said Sepp.

Sepp also points out that a lot of new spending never goes away.

"Many of the spending increases called for will be baked into future budgets going down the line even if they try to re-establish the debt ceiling a couple of years from now. So this is a real problem for taxpayers and, unfortunately, it represents the final retreat from the Budget Control Act of 2011, which established that sequester process," said Sepp.

National Taxpayers Union research shows the sequester process saved the average American household roughly $7,400 by 2017. Sepp says removing those restraints is nothing more than a massive tax hike on future generations and the future is coming sooner than wee realize.

"Deficit spending is really just tax increases on a future type of taxpayer: unborn taxpayers, or young taxpayers, even taxpayers who are currently filing their taxes down the line would face higher taxes to service all of these debts," said Sepp.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Sepp respond to suggestions that sequestration cuts were "mindless and irresponsible." He also explains why spending "offsets" are often a mirage, why the Trump administration isn't demanding more fiscal restraint, and why so few people seem to care about the mounting debt.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18615385Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:06:23 +0000Radio AmericaEager to avoid a debt ceiling showdown, the Treasury Department and congressional Democrats appear to be on the brink of a budget agreement that could saddle taxpayers with an additional $2 trillion in debt over the next decade.
According to reports,...According to reports, the agreement runs through July 31, 2021. It would effectively end all remaining elements of the 2011 Budget Control Act known as sequester, while adding $350 billion in new spending in exchange for about $75 billion in offsets.

If that seems lopsided in favor of more spending, that's because it is. But National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp says it's even worse than it looks.

"The things is there are ripple effects past two years. If you do a decade-long total, you're talking about something closer to $2 trillion of additional spending permitted by this deal," said Sepp.

Sepp also points out that a lot of new spending never goes away.

"Many of the spending increases called for will be baked into future budgets going down the line even if they try to re-establish the debt ceiling a couple of years from now. So this is a real problem for taxpayers and, unfortunately, it represents the final retreat from the Budget Control Act of 2011, which established that sequester process," said Sepp.

National Taxpayers Union research shows the sequester process saved the average American household roughly $7,400 by 2017. Sepp says removing those restraints is nothing more than a massive tax hike on future generations and the future is coming sooner than wee realize.

"Deficit spending is really just tax increases on a future type of taxpayer: unborn taxpayers, or young taxpayers, even taxpayers who are currently filing their taxes down the line would face higher taxes to service all of these debts," said Sepp.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Sepp respond to suggestions that sequestration cuts were "mindless and irresponsible." He also explains why spending "offsets" are often a mirage, why the Trump administration isn't demanding more fiscal restraint, and why so few people seem to care about the mounting debt.]]>563news,taxes,trump,democrats,budget,debt,spending,sequestration,offsetscleanfullRadio AmericaEager to avoid a debt ceiling showdown, the Treasury Department and congressional Democrats appear to be on the brink of a budget agreement that could saddle taxpayers with an additional $2 trillion in debt over the next decade.
According to reports, the agreement runs through July 31, 2021. It would effectively end all remaining elements of the 2011 Budget Control Act known as sequester, while adding $350 billion in new spending in exchange for about $75 billion in offsets.
If that seems lopsided in favor of more spending, that's because it is. But National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp says it's even worse than it looks.
"The things is there are ripple effects past two years. If you do a decade-long total, you're talking about something closer to $2 trillion of additional spending permitted by this deal," said Sepp.
Sepp also points out that a lot of new spending never goes away.
"Many of the spending increases called for will be baked into future budgets going down the line even if they try to re-establish the debt ceiling a couple of years from now. So this is a real problem for taxpayers and, unfortunately, it represents the final retreat from the Budget Control Act of 2011, which established that sequester process," said Sepp.
National Taxpayers Union research shows the sequester process saved the average American household roughly $7,400 by 2017. Sepp says removing those restraints is nothing more than a massive tax hike on future generations and the future is coming sooner than wee realize.
"Deficit spending is really just tax increases on a future type of taxpayer: unborn taxpayers, or young taxpayers, even taxpayers who are currently filing their taxes down the line would face higher taxes to service all of these debts," said Sepp.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Sepp respond to suggestions that sequestration cuts were "mindless and irresponsible." He also explains why spending "offsets" are often a mirage, why the Trump administration isn't demanding more fiscal restraint, and why so few people seem to care about the mounting debt.NoLesson from Hong Kong: The Link Between Christianity and Freedomhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/stonestreetThe latest round of unrest was triggered by a proposed law allowing the extradition of people in Hong Kong to mainland China. Millions of people poured into the streets and into the legislature to denounce the bill and the firm belief that China is hand-picking politicians in Hong Kong to do its bidding.

The people of Hong Kong are determined to protect religious freedom (and their other freedoms). The Chinese government makes no secret that it wants to stamp out Christianity in China and in Hong Kong.

When the United Kingdom handed control of Hong Kong to China in 1997, a deal was struck to allow Hong Kong to effectively govern itself and maintain freedoms of religion, speech, and the press that it enjoyed under British rule.

That means Hong Kong residents are fully aware of how the Chinese are putting Muslims into concentration camps, persecuting Christians and churches, and reportedly harvesting the organs of Buddhist prisoners. Thus, Hong Kong is fiercely protective of the rights its people ought to have in full for another 28 years.

Colson Center for Christian Worldview President John Stonestreet says Hong Kong knows what the rest of the world needs to understand - that a vibrant Christianity is almost always accompanied by much freer societies than we see from atheist regimes and others.

Stonestreet says there are two main reasons for this, starting with the now almost universal understanding that each life has value.

"Every single person has inherent dignity from the moment of birth to the moment of natural death. That is a Christian idea that has now infected the world. Now everyone talks about human dignity as if it's a thing, even though we disagree on what wee mean by that," said Stonestreet.

He says that inherent dignity fuels the demand for freedom.

"We believe God created us. Not only did he give us dignity but he gave us freedom, that ultimately our conscience answers to him. My mentor, Chuck Colson, said it very well in the Manhattan Declaration. 'We can ungrudgingly render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, but we can never render unto Caesar what belongs to God," said Stonestreet.

He says that is what compels China and other authoritarian regimes to try to stamp out the church. It simply cannot tolerate any challenge to its claim of absolute power. He says President Xi Xinping is trying to recreate himself in the mold of perhaps the worst mass murderer in world history.

"This is Mao-like stuff. The Christian gospel runs completely counter to that. When the early Christians said 'Jesus Christ is Lord,' there is an implicit 'and Caesar is not.' Well, when Hong Kong Christians say 'Jesus is Lord,' there is an implicit, 'and the Chinese government - specifically Xi Xinping - is not,'" said Stonestreet.

"That very idea spawns all kinds of other freedoms, like freedom of speech and freedom of association, the freedom to order our public lives and how we set up our business around our deeply-held beliefs.

"So you can really see how the unique Christian idea of who we are as humans spawned freedom of conscience and how freedom of conscience and how freedom of conscience is really the foundation for all the other freedoms we have," said Stonestreet.

Listen to the full podcast to hear more on the background of the Hong Kong-China tensions and China's attempt to meddle in Hong Kong affairs. Stonestreet also explains how Chinese persecution is leading to a refugee crisis and how that crisis is putting the U.S. in a difficult position.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18593851Sat, 20 Jul 2019 15:05:15 +0000Radio AmericaIn recent weeks, massive protests in Hong Kong drew the world's attention, but while the media focused on the political issues at hand, little was made over the fierce battle over Christianity between Hong Kong and the communist Chinese regime.
The...The latest round of unrest was triggered by a proposed law allowing the extradition of people in Hong Kong to mainland China. Millions of people poured into the streets and into the legislature to denounce the bill and the firm belief that China is hand-picking politicians in Hong Kong to do its bidding.

The people of Hong Kong are determined to protect religious freedom (and their other freedoms). The Chinese government makes no secret that it wants to stamp out Christianity in China and in Hong Kong.

When the United Kingdom handed control of Hong Kong to China in 1997, a deal was struck to allow Hong Kong to effectively govern itself and maintain freedoms of religion, speech, and the press that it enjoyed under British rule.

That means Hong Kong residents are fully aware of how the Chinese are putting Muslims into concentration camps, persecuting Christians and churches, and reportedly harvesting the organs of Buddhist prisoners. Thus, Hong Kong is fiercely protective of the rights its people ought to have in full for another 28 years.

Colson Center for Christian Worldview President John Stonestreet says Hong Kong knows what the rest of the world needs to understand - that a vibrant Christianity is almost always accompanied by much freer societies than we see from atheist regimes and others.

Stonestreet says there are two main reasons for this, starting with the now almost universal understanding that each life has value.

"Every single person has inherent dignity from the moment of birth to the moment of natural death. That is a Christian idea that has now infected the world. Now everyone talks about human dignity as if it's a thing, even though we disagree on what wee mean by that," said Stonestreet.

He says that inherent dignity fuels the demand for freedom.

"We believe God created us. Not only did he give us dignity but he gave us freedom, that ultimately our conscience answers to him. My mentor, Chuck Colson, said it very well in the Manhattan Declaration. 'We can ungrudgingly render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, but we can never render unto Caesar what belongs to God," said Stonestreet.

He says that is what compels China and other authoritarian regimes to try to stamp out the church. It simply cannot tolerate any challenge to its claim of absolute power. He says President Xi Xinping is trying to recreate himself in the mold of perhaps the worst mass murderer in world history.

"This is Mao-like stuff. The Christian gospel runs completely counter to that. When the early Christians said 'Jesus Christ is Lord,' there is an implicit 'and Caesar is not.' Well, when Hong Kong Christians say 'Jesus is Lord,' there is an implicit, 'and the Chinese government - specifically Xi Xinping - is not,'" said Stonestreet.

"That very idea spawns all kinds of other freedoms, like freedom of speech and freedom of association, the freedom to order our public lives and how we set up our business around our deeply-held beliefs.

"So you can really see how the unique Christian idea of who we are as humans spawned freedom of conscience and how freedom of conscience and how freedom of conscience is really the foundation for all the other freedoms we have," said Stonestreet.

Listen to the full podcast to hear more on the background of the Hong Kong-China tensions and China's attempt to meddle in Hong Kong affairs. Stonestreet also explains how Chinese persecution is leading to a refugee crisis and how that crisis is putting the U.S. in a difficult position.]]>733news,christian,china,freedom,persecution,hongkongcleanfullRadio AmericaIn recent weeks, massive protests in Hong Kong drew the world's attention, but while the media focused on the political issues at hand, little was made over the fierce battle over Christianity between Hong Kong and the communist Chinese regime.
The latest round of unrest was triggered by a proposed law allowing the extradition of people in Hong Kong to mainland China. Millions of people poured into the streets and into the legislature to denounce the bill and the firm belief that China is hand-picking politicians in Hong Kong to do its bidding.
The people of Hong Kong are determined to protect religious freedom (and their other freedoms). The Chinese government makes no secret that it wants to stamp out Christianity in China and in Hong Kong.
When the United Kingdom handed control of Hong Kong to China in 1997, a deal was struck to allow Hong Kong to effectively govern itself and maintain freedoms of religion, speech, and the press that it enjoyed under British rule.
That means Hong Kong residents are fully aware of how the Chinese are putting Muslims into concentration camps, persecuting Christians and churches, and reportedly harvesting the organs of Buddhist prisoners. Thus, Hong Kong is fiercely protective of the rights its people ought to have in full for another 28 years.
Colson Center for Christian Worldview President John Stonestreet says Hong Kong knows what the rest of the world needs to understand - that a vibrant Christianity is almost always accompanied by much freer societies than we see from atheist regimes and others.
Stonestreet says there are two main reasons for this, starting with the now almost universal understanding that each life has value.
"Every single person has inherent dignity from the moment of birth to the moment of natural death. That is a Christian idea that has now infected the world. Now everyone talks about human dignity as if it's a thing, even though we disagree on what wee mean by that," said Stonestreet.
He says that inherent dignity fuels the demand for freedom.
"We believe God created us. Not only did he give us dignity but he gave us freedom, that ultimately our conscience answers to him. My mentor, Chuck Colson, said it very well in the Manhattan Declaration. 'We can ungrudgingly render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, but we can never render unto Caesar what belongs to God," said Stonestreet.
He says that is what compels China and other authoritarian regimes to try to stamp out the church. It simply cannot tolerate any challenge to its claim of absolute power. He says President Xi Xinping is trying to recreate himself in the mold of perhaps the worst mass murderer in world history.
"This is Mao-like stuff. The Christian gospel runs completely counter to that. When the early Christians said 'Jesus Christ is Lord,' there is an implicit 'and Caesar is not.' Well, when Hong Kong Christians say 'Jesus is Lord,' there is an implicit, 'and the Chinese government - specifically Xi Xinping - is not,'" said Stonestreet.
"That very idea spawns all kinds of other freedoms, like freedom of speech and freedom of association, the freedom to order our public lives and how we set up our business around our deeply-held beliefs.
"So you can really see how the unique Christian idea of who we are as humans spawned freedom of conscience and how freedom of conscience and how freedom of conscience is really the foundation for all the other freedoms we have," said Stonestreet.
Listen to the full podcast to hear more on the background of the Hong Kong-China tensions and China's attempt to meddle in Hong Kong affairs. Stonestreet also explains how Chinese persecution is leading to a refugee crisis and how that crisis is putting the U.S. in a difficult position.NoHigh Tech Help for Veterans' Healthhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/rochaOf particular concern are veterans who live hundreds of miles or more away from VA facilities and have a difficult time ever seeing a physician.

Now the VA, American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars are teaming up with Philips North America for a pilot program to allow veterans to engage doctors through telehealth technologies and also benefit from artificial intelligence in the medical community.

In this podcast, Philips North America CEO Vitor Rocha explains how this partnership began and how it will work. He also explains the benefits of telehealth and what data will be reviewed from the pilot program to see if it will be expanded.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18584907Thu, 18 Jul 2019 21:08:30 +0000Radio AmericaVeterans are still facing long wait times to see doctors at some VA facilities. Those long wait times can mean worse illnesses and injuries.
Of particular concern are veterans who live hundreds of miles or more away from VA facilities and have a...Of particular concern are veterans who live hundreds of miles or more away from VA facilities and have a difficult time ever seeing a physician.

Now the VA, American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars are teaming up with Philips North America for a pilot program to allow veterans to engage doctors through telehealth technologies and also benefit from artificial intelligence in the medical community.

In this podcast, Philips North America CEO Vitor Rocha explains how this partnership began and how it will work. He also explains the benefits of telehealth and what data will be reviewed from the pilot program to see if it will be expanded.]]>529news,legion,american,healthcare,va,phillips,veteranscleanfullRadio AmericaVeterans are still facing long wait times to see doctors at some VA facilities. Those long wait times can mean worse illnesses and injuries.
Of particular concern are veterans who live hundreds of miles or more away from VA facilities and have a difficult time ever seeing a physician.
Now the VA, American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars are teaming up with Philips North America for a pilot program to allow veterans to engage doctors through telehealth technologies and also benefit from artificial intelligence in the medical community.
In this podcast, Philips North America CEO Vitor Rocha explains how this partnership began and how it will work. He also explains the benefits of telehealth and what data will be reviewed from the pilot program to see if it will be expanded.NoPublic Option = Government-Run Health Carehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/turner_7The Obama-Biden administration repeated that promise over and over as part of the debate over the Affordable Care Act. Due to the regulatory changes of the law, plans could not stay the same. Americans were forced into more comprehensive plans and some carriers dropped their customers altogether.

As a result, Politifact named "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan" the Lie of the Year in 2013.

Biden is now positioning himself as a moderate in the Democratic field for 2020. He says a Medicare for All approach that would abolish private insurance and leave the government in complete control is a bridge too far. Instead he is pushing a public option - a government-run plan that would compete with private coverage.

"If you like your plan, your employer-based plan, you can keep it. If in fact, you have private insurance, you can keep it," said Biden on Monday.

"The federal government has unlimited calls on taxpayer dollars. It can write the rules that everybody has to comply with. Private plans will not be able to compete, so people will inevitably lose their private plans simply because they will go under," said Turner.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Turner explain in greater detail how a public option would ultimately force private insurers out of business, what approach she believes is far better than a public option or Medicare for All, and how Americans are approaching this critical debate.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18575036Wed, 17 Jul 2019 21:07:28 +0000Radio AmericaFormer Vice President Joe Biden is once again staying very close to President Obama, this time billing his health care plan as Obamacare 2.0 and even promising once again that Americans who like their private health coverage can keep it.
The...The Obama-Biden administration repeated that promise over and over as part of the debate over the Affordable Care Act. Due to the regulatory changes of the law, plans could not stay the same. Americans were forced into more comprehensive plans and some carriers dropped their customers altogether.

As a result, Politifact named "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan" the Lie of the Year in 2013.

Biden is now positioning himself as a moderate in the Democratic field for 2020. He says a Medicare for All approach that would abolish private insurance and leave the government in complete control is a bridge too far. Instead he is pushing a public option - a government-run plan that would compete with private coverage.

"If you like your plan, your employer-based plan, you can keep it. If in fact, you have private insurance, you can keep it," said Biden on Monday.

"The federal government has unlimited calls on taxpayer dollars. It can write the rules that everybody has to comply with. Private plans will not be able to compete, so people will inevitably lose their private plans simply because they will go under," said Turner.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Turner explain in greater detail how a public option would ultimately force private insurers out of business, what approach she believes is far better than a public option or Medicare for All, and how Americans are approaching this critical debate.]]>927news,public,government,obama,biden,insurance,2020,optioncleanfullRadio AmericaFormer Vice President Joe Biden is once again staying very close to President Obama, this time billing his health care plan as Obamacare 2.0 and even promising once again that Americans who like their private health coverage can keep it.
The Obama-Biden administration repeated that promise over and over as part of the debate over the Affordable Care Act. Due to the regulatory changes of the law, plans could not stay the same. Americans were forced into more comprehensive plans and some carriers dropped their customers altogether.
As a result, Politifact named "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan" the Lie of the Year in 2013.
Biden is now positioning himself as a moderate in the Democratic field for 2020. He says a Medicare for All approach that would abolish private insurance and leave the government in complete control is a bridge too far. Instead he is pushing a public option - a government-run plan that would compete with private coverage.
"If you like your plan, your employer-based plan, you can keep it. If in fact, you have private insurance, you can keep it," said Biden on Monday.
But what Biden labels a moderate approach Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner sees as a mere stepping stone to government-run health care that kills private sector health coverage.
"The federal government has unlimited calls on taxpayer dollars. It can write the rules that everybody has to comply with. Private plans will not be able to compete, so people will inevitably lose their private plans simply because they will go under," said Turner.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Turner explain in greater detail how a public option would ultimately force private insurers out of business, what approach she believes is far better than a public option or Medicare for All, and how Americans are approaching this critical debate.NoEx-USSR Resident: Socialism 'So Fundamentally Wrong, It Cannot Work'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/silenasBut people who have lived through socialism are warning that the promised utopia is nothing more than a mirage, including Foundation for Economic Education President Zilvanis Silenas.

"It's so fundamentally wrong it cannot work," said Silenas, a native of Lithuania, which was part of the USSR until Silenas was ten years old.

Silenas remembers families commonly living in one-room apartments and is quick to point out he doesn't mean a one bedroom apartment. He says multiple families sometimes shared the equivalent of a college dormitory room.

Silenas says quality food was also unavailable to the general public and consumer goods such as a regular coat gobbled up half or even all of a monthly salary. Yet, Soviet citizens had no idea how poor they were because the government lied to them.

"People did not know they were in bad conditions. Soviet propaganda pretty much used to tell everyone everyone in the Soviet Union lived great, that the United States was suffering from a lot of problems," said Silenas.

So what does Silenas think about major presidential candidates looking to the government to run health care or pay for college educations? He calls their ideas "wrong" and "insincere." He also says the middle class will be the ones who suffer the most from more and more government control.

"Their tax bill would go up by a factor of two or even three. Even then, even those countries that supposedly have free education or free health care, it's not actually free. You have to pay a lot in the form of your taxes. Then when you you go to get these services, you find out they're not free," said Silenas.

"All of a sudden you find out that the medicine you get is only the cheapest one. If you want to get more expensive medicine, you have to pay it yourself. If you want to go to the hospital right now, you have to wait in line or you have to go to a private hospital. They're selling some of the European policies as a utopia, but they're not utopia and they're very expensive," said Silenas.

Silenas is also firing back at Yale University Law School Professor Emily Jane O'Dell who recently tweeted favorable about the USSR compared to the U.S.

“Every single person I have I [sic] asked in Central Asia (and Eastern Europe) over the past decade and a half has said life was better under the Soviets -- 100 percent,” O’Dell tweeted.

One of the reasons O'Dell sees the Soviets as superior is because "capitalism is devoid of all humanity."

That set off Silenas on the appalling record of Soviet repression and persecution.

"Entire portions of countries inside the Soviet Union were repressed or deported. A large part of the population was simply shot. So whenever someone who should know better starts saying how great life was in the Soviet Union, that is simply an offense to literally tens of millions of people who lost their lives from that regime," said Silenas.

"Where does she see humanity in actually removing people from the economy, removing people from democracy, removing people from having any say in how they live. Where does she see humanity in that?" asked Silenas.

"I can't even imagine how anyone sane would actually say something like that. There was zero humanity in the Soviet Union. Zero," he said.

Listen to the full podcast to hear more of the Silenas rant against the supposed humanity of the USSR, why government cannot care about the people, and what similarities he sees between the Soviet Union and the current Russian government.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18535618Tue, 16 Jul 2019 21:27:38 +0000Radio AmericaNearly 30 years ago, the United States and millions of others in the West cheered the collapse of the Eastern Bloc and, eventually, the Soviet Union. Now, just a few decades later, one prominent U.S. presidential candidate openly declares himself a...But people who have lived through socialism are warning that the promised utopia is nothing more than a mirage, including Foundation for Economic Education President Zilvanis Silenas.

"It's so fundamentally wrong it cannot work," said Silenas, a native of Lithuania, which was part of the USSR until Silenas was ten years old.

Silenas remembers families commonly living in one-room apartments and is quick to point out he doesn't mean a one bedroom apartment. He says multiple families sometimes shared the equivalent of a college dormitory room.

Silenas says quality food was also unavailable to the general public and consumer goods such as a regular coat gobbled up half or even all of a monthly salary. Yet, Soviet citizens had no idea how poor they were because the government lied to them.

"People did not know they were in bad conditions. Soviet propaganda pretty much used to tell everyone everyone in the Soviet Union lived great, that the United States was suffering from a lot of problems," said Silenas.

So what does Silenas think about major presidential candidates looking to the government to run health care or pay for college educations? He calls their ideas "wrong" and "insincere." He also says the middle class will be the ones who suffer the most from more and more government control.

"Their tax bill would go up by a factor of two or even three. Even then, even those countries that supposedly have free education or free health care, it's not actually free. You have to pay a lot in the form of your taxes. Then when you you go to get these services, you find out they're not free," said Silenas.

"All of a sudden you find out that the medicine you get is only the cheapest one. If you want to get more expensive medicine, you have to pay it yourself. If you want to go to the hospital right now, you have to wait in line or you have to go to a private hospital. They're selling some of the European policies as a utopia, but they're not utopia and they're very expensive," said Silenas.

Silenas is also firing back at Yale University Law School Professor Emily Jane O'Dell who recently tweeted favorable about the USSR compared to the U.S.

“Every single person I have I [sic] asked in Central Asia (and Eastern Europe) over the past decade and a half has said life was better under the Soviets -- 100 percent,” O’Dell tweeted.

One of the reasons O'Dell sees the Soviets as superior is because "capitalism is devoid of all humanity."

That set off Silenas on the appalling record of Soviet repression and persecution.

"Entire portions of countries inside the Soviet Union were repressed or deported. A large part of the population was simply shot. So whenever someone who should know better starts saying how great life was in the Soviet Union, that is simply an offense to literally tens of millions of people who lost their lives from that regime," said Silenas.

"Where does she see humanity in actually removing people from the economy, removing people from democracy, removing people from having any say in how they live. Where does she see humanity in that?" asked Silenas.

"I can't even imagine how anyone sane would actually say something like that. There was zero humanity in the Soviet Union. Zero," he said.

Listen to the full podcast to hear more of the Silenas rant against the supposed...]]>709news,economy,freedom,democrats,ussr,humanity,2020cleanfullRadio AmericaNearly 30 years ago, the United States and millions of others in the West cheered the collapse of the Eastern Bloc and, eventually, the Soviet Union. Now, just a few decades later, one prominent U.S. presidential candidate openly declares himself a Democratic Socialist and several other candidates are advocating for government-run health care, taxpayer-funded college, and other high-dollar programs that move more power from the private sector to the federal government.
But people who have lived through socialism are warning that the promised utopia is nothing more than a mirage, including Foundation for Economic Education President Zilvanis Silenas.
"It's so fundamentally wrong it cannot work," said Silenas, a native of Lithuania, which was part of the USSR until Silenas was ten years old.
Silenas remembers families commonly living in one-room apartments and is quick to point out he doesn't mean a one bedroom apartment. He says multiple families sometimes shared the equivalent of a college dormitory room.
Silenas says quality food was also unavailable to the general public and consumer goods such as a regular coat gobbled up half or even all of a monthly salary. Yet, Soviet citizens had no idea how poor they were because the government lied to them.
"People did not know they were in bad conditions. Soviet propaganda pretty much used to tell everyone everyone in the Soviet Union lived great, that the United States was suffering from a lot of problems," said Silenas.
So what does Silenas think about major presidential candidates looking to the government to run health care or pay for college educations? He calls their ideas "wrong" and "insincere." He also says the middle class will be the ones who suffer the most from more and more government control.
"Their tax bill would go up by a factor of two or even three. Even then, even those countries that supposedly have free education or free health care, it's not actually free. You have to pay a lot in the form of your taxes. Then when you you go to get these services, you find out they're not free," said Silenas.
"All of a sudden you find out that the medicine you get is only the cheapest one. If you want to get more expensive medicine, you have to pay it yourself. If you want to go to the hospital right now, you have to wait in line or you have to go to a private hospital. They're selling some of the European policies as a utopia, but they're not utopia and they're very expensive," said Silenas.
Silenas is also firing back at Yale University Law School Professor Emily Jane O'Dell who recently tweeted favorable about the USSR compared to the U.S.
“Every single person I have I [sic] asked in Central Asia (and Eastern Europe) over the past decade and a half has said life was better under the Soviets -- 100 percent,” O’Dell tweeted.
One of the reasons O'Dell sees the Soviets as superior is because "capitalism is devoid of all humanity."
That set off Silenas on the appalling record of Soviet repression and persecution.
"Entire portions of countries inside the Soviet Union were repressed or deported. A large part of the population was simply shot. So whenever someone who should know better starts saying how great life was in the Soviet Union, that is simply an offense to literally tens of millions of people who lost their lives from that regime," said Silenas.
"Where does she see humanity in actually removing people from the economy, removing people from democracy, removing people from having any say in how they live. Where does she see humanity in that?" asked Silenas.
"I can't even imagine how anyone sane would actually say something like that. There was zero humanity in the Soviet Union. Zero," he said.
Listen to the full podcast to hear more of the Silenas rant against the supposed humanity of the USSR, why government cannot care about the people, and what similarities he sees between the Soviet Union and the current Russian government.NoRecord Spending Spending Again in Washingtonhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/adam_2According to Treasury, expenditures from October through June totaled nearly $3.356 trillion. Revenues came in at just over $2.6 trillion, leaving the nation with a deficit of more than $747 billion with three more months to go.

One of the nation's top financial watchdogs says this is a bipartisan problem, noting the deficit was $5.4 trillion when George W. Bush left office. That number jumped to $19.9 trillion when Barack Obama's presidency ended. Our debt is now headed towards $23 trillion just two-and-a-half years into the Trump administration.

"Right now, we're in a period of great economic expansion. We shouldn't be running one trillion dollar budget deficits. You run budget deficits during an economic cycle when you slip into recession. You don't want to run them when you're in economic growth and expansion," said Andrzejewski.

Andrzejewski warns Republicans that running against the big government agenda of Democrats is going to be a tougher sell because of their own lack of fiscal discipline.

But with neither party wanting to remove funding for their friends and priorities, is there any room for common ground. Andrzejewski says some ways to trim the fat ought to be obvious.

"The 20 largest federal agencies since 2003, they admit to $1.4 trillion going out the door in improper payments. Just last year, our auditors at OpentheBooks.com found a billion dollars went out the door from these federal agencies to dead people," said Andrzejewski.

It gets worse. Andrzejewski says another six billion dollars went out in overpayments in student loans and grants and Medicare and Medicaid combined for $80-85 billion in improper payments.

Listen to the full podcast as Andrzejewski lists more wasteful spending projects that are wasting taxpayer dollars and how he encourages citizens to make their representatives pay attention to our soaring deficits and debt.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18536951Fri, 12 Jul 2019 21:10:11 +0000Radio AmericaThe latest report from the Treasury Department shows a record level of spending for the first nine months of the current fiscal year, and the U.S. is on it's way to a one trillion dollar deficit by the time the year is through.
According to Treasury,...According to Treasury, expenditures from October through June totaled nearly $3.356 trillion. Revenues came in at just over $2.6 trillion, leaving the nation with a deficit of more than $747 billion with three more months to go.

One of the nation's top financial watchdogs says this is a bipartisan problem, noting the deficit was $5.4 trillion when George W. Bush left office. That number jumped to $19.9 trillion when Barack Obama's presidency ended. Our debt is now headed towards $23 trillion just two-and-a-half years into the Trump administration.

"Right now, we're in a period of great economic expansion. We shouldn't be running one trillion dollar budget deficits. You run budget deficits during an economic cycle when you slip into recession. You don't want to run them when you're in economic growth and expansion," said Andrzejewski.

Andrzejewski warns Republicans that running against the big government agenda of Democrats is going to be a tougher sell because of their own lack of fiscal discipline.

But with neither party wanting to remove funding for their friends and priorities, is there any room for common ground. Andrzejewski says some ways to trim the fat ought to be obvious.

"The 20 largest federal agencies since 2003, they admit to $1.4 trillion going out the door in improper payments. Just last year, our auditors at OpentheBooks.com found a billion dollars went out the door from these federal agencies to dead people," said Andrzejewski.

It gets worse. Andrzejewski says another six billion dollars went out in overpayments in student loans and grants and Medicare and Medicaid combined for $80-85 billion in improper payments.

Listen to the full podcast as Andrzejewski lists more wasteful spending projects that are wasting taxpayer dollars and how he encourages citizens to make their representatives pay attention to our soaring deficits and debt.]]>545news,bush,obama,trump,congress,deficit,debtcleanfullRadio AmericaThe latest report from the Treasury Department shows a record level of spending for the first nine months of the current fiscal year, and the U.S. is on it's way to a one trillion dollar deficit by the time the year is through.
According to Treasury, expenditures from October through June totaled nearly $3.356 trillion. Revenues came in at just over $2.6 trillion, leaving the nation with a deficit of more than $747 billion with three more months to go.
One of the nation's top financial watchdogs says this is a bipartisan problem, noting the deficit was $5.4 trillion when George W. Bush left office. That number jumped to $19.9 trillion when Barack Obama's presidency ended. Our debt is now headed towards $23 trillion just two-and-a-half years into the Trump administration.
OpentheBooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski says the current budget deficit is particularly bad considering the strength of our economy.
"Right now, we're in a period of great economic expansion. We shouldn't be running one trillion dollar budget deficits. You run budget deficits during an economic cycle when you slip into recession. You don't want to run them when you're in economic growth and expansion," said Andrzejewski.
Andrzejewski warns Republicans that running against the big government agenda of Democrats is going to be a tougher sell because of their own lack of fiscal discipline.
But with neither party wanting to remove funding for their friends and priorities, is there any room for common ground. Andrzejewski says some ways to trim the fat ought to be obvious.
"The 20 largest federal agencies since 2003, they admit to $1.4 trillion going out the door in improper payments. Just last year, our auditors at OpentheBooks.com found a billion dollars went out the door from these federal agencies to dead people," said Andrzejewski.
It gets worse. Andrzejewski says another six billion dollars went out in overpayments in student loans and grants and Medicare and Medicaid combined for $80-85 billion in improper payments.
Listen to the full podcast as Andrzejewski lists more wasteful spending projects that are wasting taxpayer dollars and how he encourages citizens to make their representatives pay attention to our soaring deficits and debt.NoFlorida Sheriff's Deputy Accused of Framing Innocent Peoplehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/ciaramella_1According to the charges and released body cam footage, Zach Wester allegedly framed a minimum of 10 people, some of whom were involved in court-ordered recovery programs. One victim even lost custody of his daughter because of Wester's corrupt actions.

How did Wester plant drugs in people's cars? How was he caught? How did authorities respond to the allegations? What constitutional protections did most of the victims forget to invoke?

Reason.com reporter C.J. Ciaramella chronicled this horrible case on Wednesday. He joins Greg Corombos for a closer look at the details and whether there is evidence of this becoming a bigger problem.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18526407Fri, 12 Jul 2019 14:45:27 +0000Radio AmericaA former Jackson County, Florida, sheriff's deputy is facing 52 felony charges in connection with allegedly planting drugs on motorists he pulled over.
According to the charges and released body cam footage, Zach Wester allegedly framed a minimum of...According to the charges and released body cam footage, Zach Wester allegedly framed a minimum of 10 people, some of whom were involved in court-ordered recovery programs. One victim even lost custody of his daughter because of Wester's corrupt actions.

How did Wester plant drugs in people's cars? How was he caught? How did authorities respond to the allegations? What constitutional protections did most of the victims forget to invoke?

Reason.com reporter C.J. Ciaramella chronicled this horrible case on Wednesday. He joins Greg Corombos for a closer look at the details and whether there is evidence of this becoming a bigger problem.]]>608news,drugs,florida,planting,deputycleanfullRadio AmericaA former Jackson County, Florida, sheriff's deputy is facing 52 felony charges in connection with allegedly planting drugs on motorists he pulled over.
According to the charges and released body cam footage, Zach Wester allegedly framed a minimum of 10 people, some of whom were involved in court-ordered recovery programs. One victim even lost custody of his daughter because of Wester's corrupt actions.
How did Wester plant drugs in people's cars? How was he caught? How did authorities respond to the allegations? What constitutional protections did most of the victims forget to invoke?
Reason.com reporter C.J. Ciaramella chronicled this horrible case on Wednesday. He joins Greg Corombos for a closer look at the details and whether there is evidence of this becoming a bigger problem.NoInside the 5th Circuit Obamacare Fighthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/henneke_3Texas is leading a coalition of states trying to get the law declared unconstitutional. Rob Henneke of the Texas Public Policy Foundation is arguing for the law to be struck down on behalf of individual Americans. In December, a federal district judge in Texas agreed that the end of the tax penalty meant that all of Obamacare ought to be struck down. Liberal states then appealed to the Fifth Circuit.

What happened in the oral arguments before the appellate judges? Where did the judges focus most of their questions? How did they respond to the argument that only Congress, and not courts, can do away with the law?

We discuss all of this with Rob Henneke and ask whether he thinks he can win over Chief Justice John Roberts if and when the case reaches the Supreme Court.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18515126Wed, 10 Jul 2019 19:05:19 +0000Radio AmericaOn Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments over whether the repeal of the tax penalty for refusing to buy health insurance makes the entire Affordable Care Act unconstitutional.
Texas is leading a...Texas is leading a coalition of states trying to get the law declared unconstitutional. Rob Henneke of the Texas Public Policy Foundation is arguing for the law to be struck down on behalf of individual Americans. In December, a federal district judge in Texas agreed that the end of the tax penalty meant that all of Obamacare ought to be struck down. Liberal states then appealed to the Fifth Circuit.

What happened in the oral arguments before the appellate judges? Where did the judges focus most of their questions? How did they respond to the argument that only Congress, and not courts, can do away with the law?

We discuss all of this with Rob Henneke and ask whether he thinks he can win over Chief Justice John Roberts if and when the case reaches the Supreme Court.]]>639news,aca,unconstitutional,obamacare,appeals,repealcleanfullRadio AmericaOn Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments over whether the repeal of the tax penalty for refusing to buy health insurance makes the entire Affordable Care Act unconstitutional.
Texas is leading a coalition of states trying to get the law declared unconstitutional. Rob Henneke of the Texas Public Policy Foundation is arguing for the law to be struck down on behalf of individual Americans. In December, a federal district judge in Texas agreed that the end of the tax penalty meant that all of Obamacare ought to be struck down. Liberal states then appealed to the Fifth Circuit.
What happened in the oral arguments before the appellate judges? Where did the judges focus most of their questions? How did they respond to the argument that only Congress, and not courts, can do away with the law?
We discuss all of this with Rob Henneke and ask whether he thinks he can win over Chief Justice John Roberts if and when the case reaches the Supreme Court.NoWhy Didn't Republicans Get Health Care Reform Done?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/kerpen-2Kerpen explains how close Republicans came on multiple occasions and why they landed on the best approach when it was too late.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18506457Tue, 09 Jul 2019 21:08:25 +0000Radio AmericaIn the second part of our interview with American Commitment President Phil Kerpen, we examine why Republicans failed to coalesce around a health care reform bill despite controlling the House, Senate, and White House and having seven years to...Kerpen explains how close Republicans came on multiple occasions and why they landed on the best approach when it was too late.]]>350news,health,republicans,reform,statescleanfullRadio AmericaIn the second part of our interview with American Commitment President Phil Kerpen, we examine why Republicans failed to coalesce around a health care reform bill despite controlling the House, Senate, and White House and having seven years to prepare.
Kerpen explains how close Republicans came on multiple occasions and why they landed on the best approach when it was too late.NoThe Public Option Charadehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/kerpen-1And while supporters of the public option approach say their plan would allow Americans to stay with their private coverage, is that really true?

Phil Kerpen of American Commitment says the public option guarantees that we will end up with a single payer system - and probably sooner rather than later. In fact, that's what it was designed to do.

Listen to the full podcast as Kerpen explains why a public option would inevitably lead to single payer, how the insurance companies played both sides in the Obamacare debate, and whether Republicans are ready to defend a competing plan.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18506456Tue, 09 Jul 2019 21:03:45 +0000Radio AmericaSome Democratic presidential candidates want to enact a single-payer, Medicare for All health care system operated by the federal government. Others want to pursue a public option that Americans can enroll in that would compete with private...And while supporters of the public option approach say their plan would allow Americans to stay with their private coverage, is that really true?

Phil Kerpen of American Commitment says the public option guarantees that we will end up with a single payer system - and probably sooner rather than later. In fact, that's what it was designed to do.

Listen to the full podcast as Kerpen explains why a public option would inevitably lead to single payer, how the insurance companies played both sides in the Obamacare debate, and whether Republicans are ready to defend a competing plan.]]>497news,democrats,2020,singlepayer,publicoptioncleanfullRadio AmericaSome Democratic presidential candidates want to enact a single-payer, Medicare for All health care system operated by the federal government. Others want to pursue a public option that Americans can enroll in that would compete with private insurance plans.
And while supporters of the public option approach say their plan would allow Americans to stay with their private coverage, is that really true?
Phil Kerpen of American Commitment says the public option guarantees that we will end up with a single payer system - and probably sooner rather than later. In fact, that's what it was designed to do.
Listen to the full podcast as Kerpen explains why a public option would inevitably lead to single payer, how the insurance companies played both sides in the Obamacare debate, and whether Republicans are ready to defend a competing plan.NoVirginia Gun Battle Beginshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/freitas_4Northam is specifically asking the Republican-led legislature to enact universal background checks, a ban on "assault weapons," reinstating Virginia's one gun per month law and more.

But Republicans are planning a much different approach. Del. Nick Freitas is a member of the Militia, Police and Public Safety Committee, which will review every piece of legislation in this special session.

Listen to the podcast to hear Freitas explain why he believes public safety and civil liberties ought to be the top priorities for lawmakers, why he thinks Northam's proposals are more about politics than saving lives, why he expects the narrow GOP majorities to hold together on the Second Amendment, and what he makes of poll numbers showing strong support for some of the Northam agenda.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18493259Mon, 08 Jul 2019 21:05:26 +0000Radio AmericaOn July 9, the Virginia General Assembly will enter into a special session ordered by Gov. Ralph Northam to address gun violence.
Northam is specifically asking the Republican-led legislature to enact universal background checks, a ban on "assault...Northam is specifically asking the Republican-led legislature to enact universal background checks, a ban on "assault weapons," reinstating Virginia's one gun per month law and more.

But Republicans are planning a much different approach. Del. Nick Freitas is a member of the Militia, Police and Public Safety Committee, which will review every piece of legislation in this special session.

Listen to the podcast to hear Freitas explain why he believes public safety and civil liberties ought to be the top priorities for lawmakers, why he thinks Northam's proposals are more about politics than saving lives, why he expects the narrow GOP majorities to hold together on the Second Amendment, and what he makes of poll numbers showing strong support for some of the Northam agenda.]]>971news,guns,virginia,second,amendment,northamcleanfullRadio AmericaOn July 9, the Virginia General Assembly will enter into a special session ordered by Gov. Ralph Northam to address gun violence.
Northam is specifically asking the Republican-led legislature to enact universal background checks, a ban on "assault weapons," reinstating Virginia's one gun per month law and more.
But Republicans are planning a much different approach. Del. Nick Freitas is a member of the Militia, Police and Public Safety Committee, which will review every piece of legislation in this special session.
Listen to the podcast to hear Freitas explain why he believes public safety and civil liberties ought to be the top priorities for lawmakers, why he thinks Northam's proposals are more about politics than saving lives, why he expects the narrow GOP majorities to hold together on the Second Amendment, and what he makes of poll numbers showing strong support for some of the Northam agenda.NoBeyond Epstein: Internet is Front Lines of Child Sex Trafficking Nightmarehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hughes-finalBut how do predators and traffickers find children to target? How do adults find kids to abuse sexually and pay more than two billion dollars a year to do it? And what can parents do to protect their kids?

The common ingredient is the internet. While often a wonderful tool for learning and entertainment, the web can also be dangerous for kids.

In this podcast, we discuss the threats and the best preventive measures with Donna Rice Hughes of Enough is Enough.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18492046Mon, 08 Jul 2019 19:01:01 +0000Radio AmericaThe indictment of Jeffrey Epstein on child sex trafficking charges is drawing a lot of attention. It should draw attention to the fact that child sex trafficking is a booming business in the United States.
But how do predators and traffickers find...But how do predators and traffickers find children to target? How do adults find kids to abuse sexually and pay more than two billion dollars a year to do it? And what can parents do to protect their kids?

The common ingredient is the internet. While often a wonderful tool for learning and entertainment, the web can also be dangerous for kids.

In this podcast, we discuss the threats and the best preventive measures with Donna Rice Hughes of Enough is Enough.]]>1193news,sex,child,trafficking,jeffreyepsteinarrestcleanfullRadio AmericaThe indictment of Jeffrey Epstein on child sex trafficking charges is drawing a lot of attention. It should draw attention to the fact that child sex trafficking is a booming business in the United States.
But how do predators and traffickers find children to target? How do adults find kids to abuse sexually and pay more than two billion dollars a year to do it? And what can parents do to protect their kids?
The common ingredient is the internet. While often a wonderful tool for learning and entertainment, the web can also be dangerous for kids.
In this podcast, we discuss the threats and the best preventive measures with Donna Rice Hughes of Enough is Enough.NoBehind the Headlines: The Scourge of Child Sex Traffickinghttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/aufmuthBut while partisans wait to see which famous figures might be tarred by the Epstein scandal, the horrific case is a sobering reminder that child sex trafficking is much bigger than Jeffery Epstein. In fact, American adults spend more than two billion dollars a year to sexually abuse children.

How did the problem get so big? How are the kids lured into this nightmare? How is there a demand for this? And what can parents do to protect their kids? We discuss all these questions with Angela Aufmuth of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18491972Mon, 08 Jul 2019 18:52:18 +0000Radio AmericaThe media and political junkies are closely following the horrific allegations of child sex trafficking filed against longtime political operative and fundraiser Jeffrey Epstein.
But while partisans wait to see which famous figures might be tarred...But while partisans wait to see which famous figures might be tarred by the Epstein scandal, the horrific case is a sobering reminder that child sex trafficking is much bigger than Jeffery Epstein. In fact, American adults spend more than two billion dollars a year to sexually abuse children.

How did the problem get so big? How are the kids lured into this nightmare? How is there a demand for this? And what can parents do to protect their kids? We discuss all these questions with Angela Aufmuth of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.]]>1394news,sex,child,trafficking,jeffreyepsteinarrestcleanfullRadio AmericaThe media and political junkies are closely following the horrific allegations of child sex trafficking filed against longtime political operative and fundraiser Jeffrey Epstein.
But while partisans wait to see which famous figures might be tarred by the Epstein scandal, the horrific case is a sobering reminder that child sex trafficking is much bigger than Jeffery Epstein. In fact, American adults spend more than two billion dollars a year to sexually abuse children.
How did the problem get so big? How are the kids lured into this nightmare? How is there a demand for this? And what can parents do to protect their kids? We discuss all these questions with Angela Aufmuth of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.NoEssence of Evil - Part 3https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/essence-of-evil-3_1https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18491948Mon, 08 Jul 2019 18:44:42 +0000Radio AmericaIn the final installment of our series, we examine what law enforcement and lawmakers are doing to confront the horrific big business of child sex trafficking, what individual citizens can do to root out the problems in their own communities, and how...597news,sex,child,trafficking,jeffreyepsteinarrestcleanfullRadio AmericaIn the final installment of our series, we examine what law enforcement and lawmakers are doing to confront the horrific big business of child sex trafficking, what individual citizens can do to root out the problems in their own communities, and how to best stay on top of our kids' internet activity and spot the signs that a predator has already made contact with them.NoEssence of Evil - Part 2https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/essence-of-evil-2_1Here in part two of our series, we examine how children - mostly girls - are lured by predators and traffickers, how they are groomed for life as a victim, and why there are so many people in the U.S. willing to pay to have sex with kids.

Listener discretion is advised.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18491937Mon, 08 Jul 2019 18:42:54 +0000Radio AmericaSex-trafficked children are the third largest criminal commodity in the United States. Only illegal drugs and guns are more prolific. In the first installment of our Essence of Evil series, we examined the scope of the child sex trafficking, the...Here in part two of our series, we examine how children - mostly girls - are lured by predators and traffickers, how they are groomed for life as a victim, and why there are so many people in the U.S. willing to pay to have sex with kids.

Listener discretion is advised.]]>541news,sex,child,trafficking,jeffreyepsteinarrestcleanfullRadio AmericaSex-trafficked children are the third largest criminal commodity in the United States. Only illegal drugs and guns are more prolific. In the first installment of our Essence of Evil series, we examined the scope of the child sex trafficking, the horrors endured by the victims, and how this became a big business.
Here in part two of our series, we examine how children - mostly girls - are lured by predators and traffickers, how they are groomed for life as a victim, and why there are so many people in the U.S. willing to pay to have sex with kids.
Listener discretion is advised.NoEssence of Evil - Part 1https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/essence-of-evil-1_1In April, Rutherford Institute President John Whitehead wrote a column that once again alerted the nation to a horrifying fact: that adults purchasing children for sex is a booming business in America. He cited stomach-wrenching statistics like adults paying to rape kids 2.5 million times each year. And while the statistics vary, there is no question that tens of thousands of American children are trapped in the sex trafficking trade and many more are at risk.

Whitehead’s column was entitled “The Essence of Evil: Sex with Children Has Become Big Business in America.” We are borrowing that title for this series.

In the first of three installments on “Essence of Evil,”, we examine just how big the problem of child sex trafficking is, what these victims tragically endure, and how this has become big business.

Also, be sure to heart Part 2 of this series, in which we learn how children are lured by predators and traffickers. We also tackle the disturbing question of why there such a huge demand among American adults for sex with children.

Finally, in Part 3 of “Essence of Evil,” we look at solutions to this crisis in our society and explore what lawmakers, law enforcement, communities, and families can do to protect children.

Listener discretion is advised, particularly if children are present.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18491773Mon, 08 Jul 2019 18:41:00 +0000Radio AmericaMany Americans are rightly appalled by the child sex trafficking allegations against longtime political operative and fundraiser Jeffrey Epstein. But the scourge of child sex trafficking is much bigger than one case. Sadly, it's a multi-billion...In April, Rutherford Institute President John Whitehead wrote a column that once again alerted the nation to a horrifying fact: that adults purchasing children for sex is a booming business in America. He cited stomach-wrenching statistics like adults paying to rape kids 2.5 million times each year. And while the statistics vary, there is no question that tens of thousands of American children are trapped in the sex trafficking trade and many more are at risk.

Whitehead’s column was entitled “The Essence of Evil: Sex with Children Has Become Big Business in America.” We are borrowing that title for this series.

In the first of three installments on “Essence of Evil,”, we examine just how big the problem of child sex trafficking is, what these victims tragically endure, and how this has become big business.

Also, be sure to heart Part 2 of this series, in which we learn how children are lured by predators and traffickers. We also tackle the disturbing question of why there such a huge demand among American adults for sex with children.

Finally, in Part 3 of “Essence of Evil,” we look at solutions to this crisis in our society and explore what lawmakers, law enforcement, communities, and families can do to protect children.

Listener discretion is advised, particularly if children are present.]]>384news,sex,child,trafficking,jeffreyepsteinarrestcleanfullRadio AmericaMany Americans are rightly appalled by the child sex trafficking allegations against longtime political operative and fundraiser Jeffrey Epstein. But the scourge of child sex trafficking is much bigger than one case. Sadly, it's a multi-billion dollar business
In April, Rutherford Institute President John Whitehead wrote a column that once again alerted the nation to a horrifying fact: that adults purchasing children for sex is a booming business in America. He cited stomach-wrenching statistics like adults paying to rape kids 2.5 million times each year. And while the statistics vary, there is no question that tens of thousands of American children are trapped in the sex trafficking trade and many more are at risk.
Whitehead’s column was entitled “The Essence of Evil: Sex with Children Has Become Big Business in America.” We are borrowing that title for this series.
In the first of three installments on “Essence of Evil,”, we examine just how big the problem of child sex trafficking is, what these victims tragically endure, and how this has become big business.
Also, be sure to heart Part 2 of this series, in which we learn how children are lured by predators and traffickers. We also tackle the disturbing question of why there such a huge demand among American adults for sex with children.
Finally, in Part 3 of “Essence of Evil,” we look at solutions to this crisis in our society and explore what lawmakers, law enforcement, communities, and families can do to protect children.
Listener discretion is advised, particularly if children are present.NoSigning Their Lives Away: How Well Do You Know the Founders?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/dagneseWho was the signer who completed a Paul Revere-like ride to arrive in time to vote for independence and possibly save the entire effort? Which signers didn't actually support independence? And which ones suffered greatly as a result of the revolution?

Listen to the podcast for a fascinating discussion with Joseph D'Agnese, co-author of "Signing Their Lives Away: The Fame and Misfortune of the Men Who Signed the Declaration of Independence."]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18413269Wed, 03 Jul 2019 16:00:04 +0000Radio AmericaMost Americans know about Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams. Many are also familiar with Sam Adams and John Hancock. But how much do you known about the other 51 men who risked their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to declare...Who was the signer who completed a Paul Revere-like ride to arrive in time to vote for independence and possibly save the entire effort? Which signers didn't actually support independence? And which ones suffered greatly as a result of the revolution?

Listen to the podcast for a fascinating discussion with Joseph D'Agnese, co-author of "Signing Their Lives Away: The Fame and Misfortune of the Men Who Signed the Declaration of Independence."]]>938news,july,4th,independence,declaration,signerscleanfullRadio AmericaMost Americans know about Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams. Many are also familiar with Sam Adams and John Hancock. But how much do you known about the other 51 men who risked their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to declare independence from Great Britain 243 years ago.
Who was the signer who completed a Paul Revere-like ride to arrive in time to vote for independence and possibly save the entire effort? Which signers didn't actually support independence? And which ones suffered greatly as a result of the revolution?
Listen to the podcast for a fascinating discussion with Joseph D'Agnese, co-author of "Signing Their Lives Away: The Fame and Misfortune of the Men Who Signed the Declaration of Independence."NoThe Impact of the Democrats' Immigration Agendahttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/camarotaWith both parties now acknowledging a humanitarian crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border, what would be the impact of removing criminal penalties for coming into the country illegally and what would be the financial toll on taxpayers to fund health care for millions of people who failed to enter the country properly?

We discuss all these questions and more with Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18413191Mon, 01 Jul 2019 16:00:08 +0000Radio AmericaIn the first round of Democratic presidential debates in the 2020 campaign, multiple Democrats announced their goal to decriminalize illegal immigration, end deportations of people who commit no other offense than entering the country illegally, and...With both parties now acknowledging a humanitarian crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border, what would be the impact of removing criminal penalties for coming into the country illegally and what would be the financial toll on taxpayers to fund health care for millions of people who failed to enter the country properly?

We discuss all these questions and more with Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies.]]>532news,health,immigration,2020,deportation,democraticdebate,decriminalizecleanfullRadio AmericaIn the first round of Democratic presidential debates in the 2020 campaign, multiple Democrats announced their goal to decriminalize illegal immigration, end deportations of people who commit no other offense than entering the country illegally, and extend government-funded health care to those who broke the law to get here.
With both parties now acknowledging a humanitarian crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border, what would be the impact of removing criminal penalties for coming into the country illegally and what would be the financial toll on taxpayers to fund health care for millions of people who failed to enter the country properly?
We discuss all these questions and more with Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies.NoDemocrats, Health Care, and Your Freedomhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/turner_6Seems like a compromise, right? A decade ago, a public option was dropped from the Affordable Care Act because even some Democrats thought it was putting too much power in the government.

In this podcast, Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner explains why adding a public option wouldn't bring more competition to the health care market but simply grease the skids for single payer. She also discusses the looming cost to taxpayers if the U.S. goes down this road. Finally, she lays out the financial of Democrats wanting to extend taxpayer-funded health care to people in the U.S. illegally.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18413146Fri, 28 Jun 2019 20:38:53 +0000Radio AmericaSome Democratic presidential candidates want to pursue a single-payer, government-run health care system. Virtually all who don't want to go that far endorse adding a public option to the existing structure.
Seems like a compromise, right? A decade...Seems like a compromise, right? A decade ago, a public option was dropped from the Affordable Care Act because even some Democrats thought it was putting too much power in the government.

In this podcast, Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner explains why adding a public option wouldn't bring more competition to the health care market but simply grease the skids for single payer. She also discusses the looming cost to taxpayers if the U.S. goes down this road. Finally, she lays out the financial of Democrats wanting to extend taxpayer-funded health care to people in the U.S. illegally.]]>551health,immigration,singlepayer,democraticdebate,publicoptioncleanfullRadio AmericaSome Democratic presidential candidates want to pursue a single-payer, government-run health care system. Virtually all who don't want to go that far endorse adding a public option to the existing structure.
Seems like a compromise, right? A decade ago, a public option was dropped from the Affordable Care Act because even some Democrats thought it was putting too much power in the government.
In this podcast, Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner explains why adding a public option wouldn't bring more competition to the health care market but simply grease the skids for single payer. She also discusses the looming cost to taxpayers if the U.S. goes down this road. Finally, she lays out the financial of Democrats wanting to extend taxpayer-funded health care to people in the U.S. illegally.NoWhat to Expect from the New Sanctions on Iranhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/berman_1The new sanctions are aimed at key individuals inside the regime, including Supreme Leader Ali Khameini as well as military officials and even Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.

"This is an attempt by the administration to hit back at Iran for its escalation of tensions in the Persian Gulf but do so in a non-military fashion. There's been a lot of ink spilled in the media about how President Trump is rushing to war, but it's very clear that he doesn't prefer military confrontation," said American Foreign Policy Council Vice President Ilan Berman.

"He wants Iran to pay but he wants Iran to pay in a way that doesn't escalate actual physical hostilities," added Berman.

But while Iran avoided military strikes, Berman believes the sanctions could do even greater damage for the long-term health of the regime.

"This is a very shrewd move by the administration because it plays on a fault line that is very visible within Iran but much less so outside. Ordinary Iranians understand very well that the supreme leader and the unelected clergy that run Iran have enriched themselves tremendously at the expense of ordinary people," said Berman.

"The administration is trying to widen that rift that exists between the Iranian people and the Iranian leadership by highlighting just how corrupt that leadership is," he said.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Berman explain why he thinks the sanctions will force Iran back to the bargaining table and why he believes Trump's decision to pull back military strikes sent the wrong message.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18403477Thu, 27 Jun 2019 21:10:55 +0000Radio AmericaPresident Trump opted for additional sanctions against Iran in response to the shooting down of a U.S. drone last week, and one expert says the new economic penalties will make Iran leaders even less popular among its own people.
The new sanctions...The new sanctions are aimed at key individuals inside the regime, including Supreme Leader Ali Khameini as well as military officials and even Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.

"This is an attempt by the administration to hit back at Iran for its escalation of tensions in the Persian Gulf but do so in a non-military fashion. There's been a lot of ink spilled in the media about how President Trump is rushing to war, but it's very clear that he doesn't prefer military confrontation," said American Foreign Policy Council Vice President Ilan Berman.

"He wants Iran to pay but he wants Iran to pay in a way that doesn't escalate actual physical hostilities," added Berman.

But while Iran avoided military strikes, Berman believes the sanctions could do even greater damage for the long-term health of the regime.

"This is a very shrewd move by the administration because it plays on a fault line that is very visible within Iran but much less so outside. Ordinary Iranians understand very well that the supreme leader and the unelected clergy that run Iran have enriched themselves tremendously at the expense of ordinary people," said Berman.

"The administration is trying to widen that rift that exists between the Iranian people and the Iranian leadership by highlighting just how corrupt that leadership is," he said.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Berman explain why he thinks the sanctions will force Iran back to the bargaining table and why he believes Trump's decision to pull back military strikes sent the wrong message.]]>343news,trump,iran,sanctionscleanfullRadio AmericaPresident Trump opted for additional sanctions against Iran in response to the shooting down of a U.S. drone last week, and one expert says the new economic penalties will make Iran leaders even less popular among its own people.
The new sanctions are aimed at key individuals inside the regime, including Supreme Leader Ali Khameini as well as military officials and even Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.
"This is an attempt by the administration to hit back at Iran for its escalation of tensions in the Persian Gulf but do so in a non-military fashion. There's been a lot of ink spilled in the media about how President Trump is rushing to war, but it's very clear that he doesn't prefer military confrontation," said American Foreign Policy Council Vice President Ilan Berman.
"He wants Iran to pay but he wants Iran to pay in a way that doesn't escalate actual physical hostilities," added Berman.
But while Iran avoided military strikes, Berman believes the sanctions could do even greater damage for the long-term health of the regime.
"This is a very shrewd move by the administration because it plays on a fault line that is very visible within Iran but much less so outside. Ordinary Iranians understand very well that the supreme leader and the unelected clergy that run Iran have enriched themselves tremendously at the expense of ordinary people," said Berman.
"The administration is trying to widen that rift that exists between the Iranian people and the Iranian leadership by highlighting just how corrupt that leadership is," he said.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Berman explain why he thinks the sanctions will force Iran back to the bargaining table and why he believes Trump's decision to pull back military strikes sent the wrong message.NoSCOTUS Rules on Gerrymanderinghttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/scotus-ruling-6-27https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18403351Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:47:16 +0000Radio AmericaThe Supreme Court ruled Thursday that federal courts do not have the constitutional right to interfere in partisan gerrymandering claims. Julie Mitchell reports for Radio America.792020,scotus,redistricting,gerrymanderingcleanfullRadio AmericaThe Supreme Court ruled Thursday that federal courts do not have the constitutional right to interfere in partisan gerrymandering claims. Julie Mitchell reports for Radio America.NoMueller to Testify Publicly Before Congresshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mueller-testifieshttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18401307Thu, 27 Jun 2019 17:15:05 +0000Radio AmericaFormer special counsel Robert Mueller will testify before congress on July 17th. Matt Fisher reports.68trump,congress,doj,russia,muellercleanfullRadio AmericaFormer special counsel Robert Mueller will testify before congress on July 17th. Matt Fisher reports.NoCongressional Border Battleshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/yohoOn Wednesday, The Senate rejected legislation passed by House Democrats and approved its own $4.6 billion measure. House Democrats say the Senate bill is a non-starter.

While the two chambers head to the reconciliation process, Florida Rep. Ted Yoho says lawmakers cannot embrace what he considers an abandonment of law enforcement personnel along the border.

"It limits the authority of the Department of Homeland Security to surge employees at the border. [The House bill] cuts overtime hours cuts overtime for the exhausted officers that we have working overtime. They want to cut this. These are the very people doing what we hired them to do," said Yoho.

Yoho says Democrats also want to cut funding for the National Guard at the border and voted down funding for enhanced border technology that could not only detect illegal entry into the country but also protect migrants from sexual assault and trafficking by drug cartels.

He says the partisan bickering on this issue needs to stop.

"The border crisis is not a political crisis. Well, it is a political crisis because Congress has failed to act. But we should not be Republicans or Democrats. We should come together to have a border security bill that solves this problem," said Yoho.

"If we were doing what we were supposed to with border security and enforced the laws on the books, we wouldn't have a crisis down there," said Yoho.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Yoho discuss whether the House and Senate can find common ground in the border funding bill. He also details why he believes the Freedom Caucus deserves credit for forcing a fight on this issue and how his forthcoming bill to reform policy for immigrant workers in the agriculture, hospitality, and construction sectors can help address the larger need for immigration reform.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18390793Thu, 27 Jun 2019 02:35:45 +0000Radio AmericaThe House and Senate will need to reconcile vastly different bills designed to provide billions of dollars in emergency aid for the humanitarian crisis building on our southern border.
On Wednesday, The Senate rejected legislation passed by House...On Wednesday, The Senate rejected legislation passed by House Democrats and approved its own $4.6 billion measure. House Democrats say the Senate bill is a non-starter.

While the two chambers head to the reconciliation process, Florida Rep. Ted Yoho says lawmakers cannot embrace what he considers an abandonment of law enforcement personnel along the border.

"It limits the authority of the Department of Homeland Security to surge employees at the border. [The House bill] cuts overtime hours cuts overtime for the exhausted officers that we have working overtime. They want to cut this. These are the very people doing what we hired them to do," said Yoho.

Yoho says Democrats also want to cut funding for the National Guard at the border and voted down funding for enhanced border technology that could not only detect illegal entry into the country but also protect migrants from sexual assault and trafficking by drug cartels.

He says the partisan bickering on this issue needs to stop.

"The border crisis is not a political crisis. Well, it is a political crisis because Congress has failed to act. But we should not be Republicans or Democrats. We should come together to have a border security bill that solves this problem," said Yoho.

"If we were doing what we were supposed to with border security and enforced the laws on the books, we wouldn't have a crisis down there," said Yoho.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Yoho discuss whether the House and Senate can find common ground in the border funding bill. He also details why he believes the Freedom Caucus deserves credit for forcing a fight on this issue and how his forthcoming bill to reform policy for immigrant workers in the agriculture, hospitality, and construction sectors can help address the larger need for immigration reform.]]>651news,immigration,congress,legislation,bordercleanfullRadio AmericaThe House and Senate will need to reconcile vastly different bills designed to provide billions of dollars in emergency aid for the humanitarian crisis building on our southern border.
On Wednesday, The Senate rejected legislation passed by House Democrats and approved its own $4.6 billion measure. House Democrats say the Senate bill is a non-starter.
While the two chambers head to the reconciliation process, Florida Rep. Ted Yoho says lawmakers cannot embrace what he considers an abandonment of law enforcement personnel along the border.
"It limits the authority of the Department of Homeland Security to surge employees at the border. [The House bill] cuts overtime hours cuts overtime for the exhausted officers that we have working overtime. They want to cut this. These are the very people doing what we hired them to do," said Yoho.
Yoho says Democrats also want to cut funding for the National Guard at the border and voted down funding for enhanced border technology that could not only detect illegal entry into the country but also protect migrants from sexual assault and trafficking by drug cartels.
He says the partisan bickering on this issue needs to stop.
"The border crisis is not a political crisis. Well, it is a political crisis because Congress has failed to act. But we should not be Republicans or Democrats. We should come together to have a border security bill that solves this problem," said Yoho.
"If we were doing what we were supposed to with border security and enforced the laws on the books, we wouldn't have a crisis down there," said Yoho.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Yoho discuss whether the House and Senate can find common ground in the border funding bill. He also details why he believes the Freedom Caucus deserves credit for forcing a fight on this issue and how his forthcoming bill to reform policy for immigrant workers in the agriculture, hospitality, and construction sectors can help address the larger need for immigration reform.NoColorado Baker in LGBT Cross Hairs Againhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/scruggsAlliance Defending Freedom is defending Phillips again. Senior Counsel Jonathan Scruggs says a single attorney is bound and determined to make Phillips suffer the legal consequences of not accommodating the LGBT agenda.

This time a transgendered person identifying as a woman named Autumn Scardina wanted Phillips to make a cake celebrating Scardina's decision to go public with a change in gender identity. Scruggs says it's just the latest attempt by Scardina and others to sue Phillips.

"It really has been a story of harassment. Jack has received all these different kinds of requests, particularly from this one lawyer but from other people too that are really meant to harass him - things like celebrating Satan's birthday or other obscene requests that no person would want to create," said Scruggs.

The Colorado Civil Right Commission was chastened by the Supreme Court for not treating Phillips in a neutral fashion based on his faith. The commission initially joined this latest lawsuit but backed away when the Alliance Defending Freedom presented additional evidence of the state officials treating Phillips in a biased fashion.

While Scruggs believes Phillips is on very strong legal ground, it's still an extremely stressful time for him.

"The government didn't want to touch this in the State of Colorado but now that attorney (Scardina), who didn't like the result of that case, has filed suit against Jack and is seeking attorneys fees and damages that really could put Jack in a very difficult financial situation. Really, his livelihood is on the line," said Scruggs.

Listen to the full podcast to hear how ADF forced the Colorado Civil Rights Commission to back away from the case, how Phillips approaches his job in the midst of this debate, and what Scruggs thinks of the Equality Act, which would remove the legal underpinning for people like Phillips to live out their faith.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18321790Mon, 24 Jun 2019 16:00:19 +0000Radio AmericaLast year, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with a Colorado baker who was punished by the government for refusing to design a wedding cake for a same-sex couple based on his sincerely-held Christian beliefs. But Jack Phillips is headed back to court yet...Alliance Defending Freedom is defending Phillips again. Senior Counsel Jonathan Scruggs says a single attorney is bound and determined to make Phillips suffer the legal consequences of not accommodating the LGBT agenda.

This time a transgendered person identifying as a woman named Autumn Scardina wanted Phillips to make a cake celebrating Scardina's decision to go public with a change in gender identity. Scruggs says it's just the latest attempt by Scardina and others to sue Phillips.

"It really has been a story of harassment. Jack has received all these different kinds of requests, particularly from this one lawyer but from other people too that are really meant to harass him - things like celebrating Satan's birthday or other obscene requests that no person would want to create," said Scruggs.

The Colorado Civil Right Commission was chastened by the Supreme Court for not treating Phillips in a neutral fashion based on his faith. The commission initially joined this latest lawsuit but backed away when the Alliance Defending Freedom presented additional evidence of the state officials treating Phillips in a biased fashion.

While Scruggs believes Phillips is on very strong legal ground, it's still an extremely stressful time for him.

"The government didn't want to touch this in the State of Colorado but now that attorney (Scardina), who didn't like the result of that case, has filed suit against Jack and is seeking attorneys fees and damages that really could put Jack in a very difficult financial situation. Really, his livelihood is on the line," said Scruggs.

Listen to the full podcast to hear how ADF forced the Colorado Civil Rights Commission to back away from the case, how Phillips approaches his job in the midst of this debate, and what Scruggs thinks of the Equality Act, which would remove the legal underpinning for people like Phillips to live out their faith.]]>545news,colorado,phillips,adf,scardinacleanfullRadio AmericaLast year, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with a Colorado baker who was punished by the government for refusing to design a wedding cake for a same-sex couple based on his sincerely-held Christian beliefs. But Jack Phillips is headed back to court yet again after refusing to make a cake celebrating the coming out of a transgender person.
Alliance Defending Freedom is defending Phillips again. Senior Counsel Jonathan Scruggs says a single attorney is bound and determined to make Phillips suffer the legal consequences of not accommodating the LGBT agenda.
This time a transgendered person identifying as a woman named Autumn Scardina wanted Phillips to make a cake celebrating Scardina's decision to go public with a change in gender identity. Scruggs says it's just the latest attempt by Scardina and others to sue Phillips.
"It really has been a story of harassment. Jack has received all these different kinds of requests, particularly from this one lawyer but from other people too that are really meant to harass him - things like celebrating Satan's birthday or other obscene requests that no person would want to create," said Scruggs.
The Colorado Civil Right Commission was chastened by the Supreme Court for not treating Phillips in a neutral fashion based on his faith. The commission initially joined this latest lawsuit but backed away when the Alliance Defending Freedom presented additional evidence of the state officials treating Phillips in a biased fashion.
While Scruggs believes Phillips is on very strong legal ground, it's still an extremely stressful time for him.
"The government didn't want to touch this in the State of Colorado but now that attorney (Scardina), who didn't like the result of that case, has filed suit against Jack and is seeking attorneys fees and damages that really could put Jack in a very difficult financial situation. Really, his livelihood is on the line," said Scruggs.
Listen to the full podcast to hear how ADF forced the Colorado Civil Rights Commission to back away from the case, how Phillips approaches his job in the midst of this debate, and what Scruggs thinks of the Equality Act, which would remove the legal underpinning for people like Phillips to live out their faith.NoIran Provoking U.S. to Distract from Domestic Crisishttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/alireza_1Alireza Jafarzadeh is deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which is the Iranian parliament in exile. He urges Trump to keep the pressure on Tehran.

"The last thing you want to show is indecisiveness, to give them concessions, to give the ayatollahs what they want," said Jafarzadeh, who says he is not suggesting Trump's decision to call off an attack qualifies as indecisive.

Critics of a hawkish policy towards Iran suggest it could spark a brutal war in the region. Jafarzadeh says those people are too late because Iran has been waging war for the past four decades.

"The rest of the world looks at 40 years of the regime's terror and hostage-taking and creating proxies in the whole Middle East," said Jafarzadeh, pointing to Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran sponsoring deadly aggression in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen.

He says Iran's unrelenting aggression in the region is now seen as "part and parcel" of the reality in the Middle East but it doesn't have to be that way.

So why is Iran continuing to provoke the United States by attacking tankers, flouting uranium enrichment limits and even shooting down an American drone? Jafarzadeh says the mullahs in Iran are desperate to change the subject with their own people.

"The Iranian regime is facing a lot of domestic problems, first in terms of the uprisings that began a year-and-a-half ago that has continued. There is a huge amount of corruption going on that has translated to political unrest because the people of Iran hold the people responsible for their misery and hardship for the mismanagement and how the resources of the country are being plundered," said Jafarzadeh.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Jafarzadeh detail the depth of the frustration by the Iranian people toward their own government and what the U.S. can do to best facilitate the people taking back the power in Tehran.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18341256Sat, 22 Jun 2019 06:03:44 +0000Radio AmericaA leading Iranian resistance group urges President Trump to demonstrate strength and resolve in confronting Iran over its provocative actions against the U.S. and others in the region, insisting that such pressure will assist the Iranian people in...Alireza Jafarzadeh is deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which is the Iranian parliament in exile. He urges Trump to keep the pressure on Tehran.

"The last thing you want to show is indecisiveness, to give them concessions, to give the ayatollahs what they want," said Jafarzadeh, who says he is not suggesting Trump's decision to call off an attack qualifies as indecisive.

Critics of a hawkish policy towards Iran suggest it could spark a brutal war in the region. Jafarzadeh says those people are too late because Iran has been waging war for the past four decades.

"The rest of the world looks at 40 years of the regime's terror and hostage-taking and creating proxies in the whole Middle East," said Jafarzadeh, pointing to Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran sponsoring deadly aggression in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen.

He says Iran's unrelenting aggression in the region is now seen as "part and parcel" of the reality in the Middle East but it doesn't have to be that way.

So why is Iran continuing to provoke the United States by attacking tankers, flouting uranium enrichment limits and even shooting down an American drone? Jafarzadeh says the mullahs in Iran are desperate to change the subject with their own people.

"The Iranian regime is facing a lot of domestic problems, first in terms of the uprisings that began a year-and-a-half ago that has continued. There is a huge amount of corruption going on that has translated to political unrest because the people of Iran hold the people responsible for their misery and hardship for the mismanagement and how the resources of the country are being plundered," said Jafarzadeh.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Jafarzadeh detail the depth of the frustration by the Iranian people toward their own government and what the U.S. can do to best facilitate the people taking back the power in Tehran.]]>637news,economy,trump,protests,iran,resistance,corruptioncleanfullRadio AmericaA leading Iranian resistance group urges President Trump to demonstrate strength and resolve in confronting Iran over its provocative actions against the U.S. and others in the region, insisting that such pressure will assist the Iranian people in toppling their own government.
Alireza Jafarzadeh is deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which is the Iranian parliament in exile. He urges Trump to keep the pressure on Tehran.
"The last thing you want to show is indecisiveness, to give them concessions, to give the ayatollahs what they want," said Jafarzadeh, who says he is not suggesting Trump's decision to call off an attack qualifies as indecisive.
Critics of a hawkish policy towards Iran suggest it could spark a brutal war in the region. Jafarzadeh says those people are too late because Iran has been waging war for the past four decades.
"The rest of the world looks at 40 years of the regime's terror and hostage-taking and creating proxies in the whole Middle East," said Jafarzadeh, pointing to Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran sponsoring deadly aggression in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen.
He says Iran's unrelenting aggression in the region is now seen as "part and parcel" of the reality in the Middle East but it doesn't have to be that way.
So why is Iran continuing to provoke the United States by attacking tankers, flouting uranium enrichment limits and even shooting down an American drone? Jafarzadeh says the mullahs in Iran are desperate to change the subject with their own people.
"The Iranian regime is facing a lot of domestic problems, first in terms of the uprisings that began a year-and-a-half ago that has continued. There is a huge amount of corruption going on that has translated to political unrest because the people of Iran hold the people responsible for their misery and hardship for the mismanagement and how the resources of the country are being plundered," said Jafarzadeh.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Jafarzadeh detail the depth of the frustration by the Iranian people toward their own government and what the U.S. can do to best facilitate the people taking back the power in Tehran.NoNash: Trump Put Gun to Iran's Headhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/nash_3"I think this was putting a gun to their head, cocking the hammer, and then pulling it off and uncocking it and saying next time I may pull the trigger," said Nash, who is a longtime expert on the Iranian regime.

Trump says he called off the attack after learning approximately 150 people in Iran were likely to die, a toll he considers disproportionate to shooting down an unmanned U.S. drone.

Nash believes there will be no kinetic response to the drone attack but Trump is leaving no ambiguity as to what will happen if Iran's provocations result in any loss of life.

"If anything else happens, it's all on the ayatollahs. It is now. But clearly, for the world, [Trump] pulled back. He got the message across. If they do anything else, Trump has free rein," warned Nash.

He says Iran is left with a tough dilemma.

"If they do anything that causes the loss of life, this president will literally explode on them. If that happens, they are facing the end of their regime. So they have to weigh in the balance of trying to hold on to the regime over severe public discontent over the economy and the way the country's being governed - and balance that against losing the regime catastrophically," said Nash.

Nash says Iran was hoping to prompt Trump to overreact or not react at all in order to distract its people from their domestic disaster. U.S.-led sanctions and Iranian government corruption have Iran in major economic trouble.

"Here's what's going on inside Iran: there are demonstrations against the regime weekly. They don't get any press. They've got crushing unemployment," said Nash, who also detailed the soaring Iranian inflation.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Nash explain more of Iran's domestic woes, why Europe has no choice but to side with the U.S. now, what we may have learned about Iranian defenses by starting to launch an attack, and how he was once poised to carry out airstrikes as a naval aviator before getting orders to stand down just before takeoff.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18341243Fri, 21 Jun 2019 21:38:34 +0000Radio AmericaPresident Trump authorized military strikes against Iran but cancelled the attack just minutes before the missiles would have launched, a move that retired U.S. Navy Capt. Chuck Nash says sent an unmistakable message to the mullahs in Iran.
"I think..."I think this was putting a gun to their head, cocking the hammer, and then pulling it off and uncocking it and saying next time I may pull the trigger," said Nash, who is a longtime expert on the Iranian regime.

Trump says he called off the attack after learning approximately 150 people in Iran were likely to die, a toll he considers disproportionate to shooting down an unmanned U.S. drone.

Nash believes there will be no kinetic response to the drone attack but Trump is leaving no ambiguity as to what will happen if Iran's provocations result in any loss of life.

"If anything else happens, it's all on the ayatollahs. It is now. But clearly, for the world, [Trump] pulled back. He got the message across. If they do anything else, Trump has free rein," warned Nash.

He says Iran is left with a tough dilemma.

"If they do anything that causes the loss of life, this president will literally explode on them. If that happens, they are facing the end of their regime. So they have to weigh in the balance of trying to hold on to the regime over severe public discontent over the economy and the way the country's being governed - and balance that against losing the regime catastrophically," said Nash.

Nash says Iran was hoping to prompt Trump to overreact or not react at all in order to distract its people from their domestic disaster. U.S.-led sanctions and Iranian government corruption have Iran in major economic trouble.

"Here's what's going on inside Iran: there are demonstrations against the regime weekly. They don't get any press. They've got crushing unemployment," said Nash, who also detailed the soaring Iranian inflation.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Nash explain more of Iran's domestic woes, why Europe has no choice but to side with the U.S. now, what we may have learned about Iranian defenses by starting to launch an attack, and how he was once poised to carry out airstrikes as a naval aviator before getting orders to stand down just before takeoff.]]>596news,economy,trump,iran,dronecleanfullRadio AmericaPresident Trump authorized military strikes against Iran but cancelled the attack just minutes before the missiles would have launched, a move that retired U.S. Navy Capt. Chuck Nash says sent an unmistakable message to the mullahs in Iran.
"I think this was putting a gun to their head, cocking the hammer, and then pulling it off and uncocking it and saying next time I may pull the trigger," said Nash, who is a longtime expert on the Iranian regime.
Trump says he called off the attack after learning approximately 150 people in Iran were likely to die, a toll he considers disproportionate to shooting down an unmanned U.S. drone.
Nash believes there will be no kinetic response to the drone attack but Trump is leaving no ambiguity as to what will happen if Iran's provocations result in any loss of life.
"If anything else happens, it's all on the ayatollahs. It is now. But clearly, for the world, [Trump] pulled back. He got the message across. If they do anything else, Trump has free rein," warned Nash.
He says Iran is left with a tough dilemma.
"If they do anything that causes the loss of life, this president will literally explode on them. If that happens, they are facing the end of their regime. So they have to weigh in the balance of trying to hold on to the regime over severe public discontent over the economy and the way the country's being governed - and balance that against losing the regime catastrophically," said Nash.
Nash says Iran was hoping to prompt Trump to overreact or not react at all in order to distract its people from their domestic disaster. U.S.-led sanctions and Iranian government corruption have Iran in major economic trouble.
"Here's what's going on inside Iran: there are demonstrations against the regime weekly. They don't get any press. They've got crushing unemployment," said Nash, who also detailed the soaring Iranian inflation.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Nash explain more of Iran's domestic woes, why Europe has no choice but to side with the U.S. now, what we may have learned about Iranian defenses by starting to launch an attack, and how he was once poised to carry out airstrikes as a naval aviator before getting orders to stand down just before takeoff.NoHigh Court Says Cross Stayshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/weberIn his majority opinion in American Legion v. American Humanist Association, Justice Samuel Alito says the "Peace Cross" in Bladensburg, Maryland, is clearly a Christian symbol but there is also historical and community significance to the 93-year-old memorial constructed to honor local soldiers who died in World War I.

The vote was 7-2, with multiple concurring opinions and a dissent from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg that was joined by Sonia Sotomayor. Justice Clarence Thomas said the cross was "clearly constitutional." Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the memorial should stand on "history, tradition, and precedent." Justice Neil Gorsuch said the American Humanist Association did not even have standing to argue the case.

In her dissent, Ginsburg says it would be inappropriate to honor Christian soldiers with a Star of David so it is wrong to pay tribute to people of varying faiths under a cross. Justice Stephen Breyer sided with the majority but strongly suggested he would not support new monuments or displays in the form of a cross.

The Family Research Council submitted a friend of the court brief in defense of the "Peace Cross." FRC Vice President for Policy Travis Weber says this is a good day for religious freedom.

"The court today said this memorial can stand. It's perfectly consistent with the Establishment Clause of the first amendment. It's not an establishment of religion. It's good to see a majority of the court agreeing with this result," said Weber, who also directs the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council.

Weber says those on the other side of the debate have a deeply flawed understanding of what the framers of the Constitution meant when they forbade Congress from establishing religion.

"It's very clear that they were getting at the state setting up formally a system of religious belief and forcing people to abide by that specific system of religious belief. They were not getting at any religious expression in the public square," said Weber.

While Weber is grateful for Thursday's ruling, he wishes the court would be even more decisive.

"The court could have gone further to clarify the tangled confusion of the Establishment Clause case law that's currently on the books. The heartening thing is this moves us in the right direction," said Weber.

Listen to the full podcast to hear why Thursday's ruling could spell the end of the "Lemon test," which is often used by lower courts to remove religious symbols from the public square. He also responds to Justice Ginsburg's argument that a cross should not be used for a memorial to soldiers of multiple faiths.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18330737Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:56:47 +0000Radio AmericaThe U.S. Supreme Court Thursday ruled that a Maryland war memorial in the shape of a giant cross does not constitute government endorsement of a particular faith and can stay in place, a ruling hailed by religious freedom advocates and slammed by...In his majority opinion in American Legion v. American Humanist Association, Justice Samuel Alito says the "Peace Cross" in Bladensburg, Maryland, is clearly a Christian symbol but there is also historical and community significance to the 93-year-old memorial constructed to honor local soldiers who died in World War I.

The vote was 7-2, with multiple concurring opinions and a dissent from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg that was joined by Sonia Sotomayor. Justice Clarence Thomas said the cross was "clearly constitutional." Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the memorial should stand on "history, tradition, and precedent." Justice Neil Gorsuch said the American Humanist Association did not even have standing to argue the case.

In her dissent, Ginsburg says it would be inappropriate to honor Christian soldiers with a Star of David so it is wrong to pay tribute to people of varying faiths under a cross. Justice Stephen Breyer sided with the majority but strongly suggested he would not support new monuments or displays in the form of a cross.

The Family Research Council submitted a friend of the court brief in defense of the "Peace Cross." FRC Vice President for Policy Travis Weber says this is a good day for religious freedom.

"The court today said this memorial can stand. It's perfectly consistent with the Establishment Clause of the first amendment. It's not an establishment of religion. It's good to see a majority of the court agreeing with this result," said Weber, who also directs the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council.

Weber says those on the other side of the debate have a deeply flawed understanding of what the framers of the Constitution meant when they forbade Congress from establishing religion.

"It's very clear that they were getting at the state setting up formally a system of religious belief and forcing people to abide by that specific system of religious belief. They were not getting at any religious expression in the public square," said Weber.

While Weber is grateful for Thursday's ruling, he wishes the court would be even more decisive.

"The court could have gone further to clarify the tangled confusion of the Establishment Clause case law that's currently on the books. The heartening thing is this moves us in the right direction," said Weber.

Listen to the full podcast to hear why Thursday's ruling could spell the end of the "Lemon test," which is often used by lower courts to remove religious symbols from the public square. He also responds to Justice Ginsburg's argument that a cross should not be used for a memorial to soldiers of multiple faiths.]]>620news,cross,freedom,constitution,religious,clause,scotus,establishmentcleanfullRadio AmericaThe U.S. Supreme Court Thursday ruled that a Maryland war memorial in the shape of a giant cross does not constitute government endorsement of a particular faith and can stay in place, a ruling hailed by religious freedom advocates and slammed by secularists.
In his majority opinion in American Legion v. American Humanist Association, Justice Samuel Alito says the "Peace Cross" in Bladensburg, Maryland, is clearly a Christian symbol but there is also historical and community significance to the 93-year-old memorial constructed to honor local soldiers who died in World War I.
The vote was 7-2, with multiple concurring opinions and a dissent from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg that was joined by Sonia Sotomayor. Justice Clarence Thomas said the cross was "clearly constitutional." Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the memorial should stand on "history, tradition, and precedent." Justice Neil Gorsuch said the American Humanist Association did not even have standing to argue the case.
In her dissent, Ginsburg says it would be inappropriate to honor Christian soldiers with a Star of David so it is wrong to pay tribute to people of varying faiths under a cross. Justice Stephen Breyer sided with the majority but strongly suggested he would not support new monuments or displays in the form of a cross.
The Family Research Council submitted a friend of the court brief in defense of the "Peace Cross." FRC Vice President for Policy Travis Weber says this is a good day for religious freedom.
"The court today said this memorial can stand. It's perfectly consistent with the Establishment Clause of the first amendment. It's not an establishment of religion. It's good to see a majority of the court agreeing with this result," said Weber, who also directs the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council.
Weber says those on the other side of the debate have a deeply flawed understanding of what the framers of the Constitution meant when they forbade Congress from establishing religion.
"It's very clear that they were getting at the state setting up formally a system of religious belief and forcing people to abide by that specific system of religious belief. They were not getting at any religious expression in the public square," said Weber.
While Weber is grateful for Thursday's ruling, he wishes the court would be even more decisive.
"The court could have gone further to clarify the tangled confusion of the Establishment Clause case law that's currently on the books. The heartening thing is this moves us in the right direction," said Weber.
Listen to the full podcast to hear why Thursday's ruling could spell the end of the "Lemon test," which is often used by lower courts to remove religious symbols from the public square. He also responds to Justice Ginsburg's argument that a cross should not be used for a memorial to soldiers of multiple faiths.NoTrump Deportations: What's Going to Happen?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/arthur_2Why would Trump announce this publicly? How does the timing of this intersect with his recent immigration deal with Mexico? How active has the Trump administration been in deporting illegal immigrants to this point? And how is ICE likely to prioritize deportations as part of this new effort?

Listen to the full podcast to learn the answers and much more as Greg Corombos interviews Center for Immigration Studies Resident Fellow in Law and Policy Andrew Arthur.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18311130Tue, 18 Jun 2019 21:04:06 +0000Radio AmericaPresident Trump announced via Twitter that he is ordering Immigration and Customs Enforcement to deport millions of people illegally in the United States.
Why would Trump announce this publicly? How does the timing of this intersect with his recent...Why would Trump announce this publicly? How does the timing of this intersect with his recent immigration deal with Mexico? How active has the Trump administration been in deporting illegal immigrants to this point? And how is ICE likely to prioritize deportations as part of this new effort?

Listen to the full podcast to learn the answers and much more as Greg Corombos interviews Center for Immigration Studies Resident Fellow in Law and Policy Andrew Arthur.]]>646mexico,trump,immigration,guatemala,ice,criminals,deportationscleanfullRadio AmericaPresident Trump announced via Twitter that he is ordering Immigration and Customs Enforcement to deport millions of people illegally in the United States.
Why would Trump announce this publicly? How does the timing of this intersect with his recent immigration deal with Mexico? How active has the Trump administration been in deporting illegal immigrants to this point? And how is ICE likely to prioritize deportations as part of this new effort?
Listen to the full podcast to learn the answers and much more as Greg Corombos interviews Center for Immigration Studies Resident Fellow in Law and Policy Andrew Arthur.NoShanahan Withdraws Defense Secretary Nominationhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/shanahan-1https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18311081Tue, 18 Jun 2019 20:44:58 +0000Radio AmericaActing Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan withdrew his nomination for Defense Secretary Tuesday after allegations of domestic abuse surfaced. Montie Montgomery has more.74trump,defense,dod,shanahancleanfullRadio AmericaActing Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan withdrew his nomination for Defense Secretary Tuesday after allegations of domestic abuse surfaced. Montie Montgomery has more.NoWhy the Trade War Hurts China Morehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/china-trade"China has a trade-dependent economy and we do not," said Gordon Chang, an East Asia policy expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China." "Last year, China's trade surplus with the U.S. accounted for 199.3 percent of it's overall merchandise surplus. That's incredible dependence on access to the U.S. market."

According to Chang, the U.S. needs to hammer China for anywhere between $150-600 billion to counter China's prolific theft of U.S. intellectual property, or IP.

Many free trade advocates, including those in President Trump's own party, agree that China is running roughshod over intellectual property rights but they contend Trump's approach will only result in higher costs for American consumers.

Chang agrees that Americans will feel some pain, but he believes it will be mild compared to the impact on China.

"Yes, these tariffs will hurt us but China, up to now, has been absorbing probably more of the cost of these tariffs than we have. So President Trump has been correct," said Chang, who warns the financial impact on American consumers will get more severe the longer the trade impasse continues.

"As he extends tariffs to all Chinese good, which could happen in the not-too-distant future, then the percentage borne by the United States will be higher for sure. But at some point, we have got to recognize that we cannot sustain the loss of all of this IP and that this is a critical threat to our economy and our society," said Chang.

But Chang insists if we're going to stop China's predatory practices, the U.S. must pursue this course.

"We've just got to realize that we cannot get out of decades of misguided trade policy with China and expect there will be no cost. There is a cost already and we're going to have to bear it in ways which are more obvious than in the past," said Chang.

Listen to the full podcast to hear whether no deal is better than a good deal with China for the foreseeable future and why Chang thinks Trump is making a big mistake in how he is dealing with China when it comes to the North Korean nuclear threat.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18254161Mon, 17 Jun 2019 20:52:58 +0000Radio AmericaThe United States and China are engaged in high-level trade talks punctuated by tariffs inflicted in both directions, and while U.S. consumers may soon feel the pinch of higher prices, a leading China expert says the communist regime in Beijing is..."China has a trade-dependent economy and we do not," said Gordon Chang, an East Asia policy expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China." "Last year, China's trade surplus with the U.S. accounted for 199.3 percent of it's overall merchandise surplus. That's incredible dependence on access to the U.S. market."

According to Chang, the U.S. needs to hammer China for anywhere between $150-600 billion to counter China's prolific theft of U.S. intellectual property, or IP.

Many free trade advocates, including those in President Trump's own party, agree that China is running roughshod over intellectual property rights but they contend Trump's approach will only result in higher costs for American consumers.

Chang agrees that Americans will feel some pain, but he believes it will be mild compared to the impact on China.

"Yes, these tariffs will hurt us but China, up to now, has been absorbing probably more of the cost of these tariffs than we have. So President Trump has been correct," said Chang, who warns the financial impact on American consumers will get more severe the longer the trade impasse continues.

"As he extends tariffs to all Chinese good, which could happen in the not-too-distant future, then the percentage borne by the United States will be higher for sure. But at some point, we have got to recognize that we cannot sustain the loss of all of this IP and that this is a critical threat to our economy and our society," said Chang.

But Chang insists if we're going to stop China's predatory practices, the U.S. must pursue this course.

"We've just got to realize that we cannot get out of decades of misguided trade policy with China and expect there will be no cost. There is a cost already and we're going to have to bear it in ways which are more obvious than in the past," said Chang.

Listen to the full podcast to hear whether no deal is better than a good deal with China for the foreseeable future and why Chang thinks Trump is making a big mistake in how he is dealing with China when it comes to the North Korean nuclear threat.]]>311news,trump,china,trade,tariffscleanfullRadio AmericaThe United States and China are engaged in high-level trade talks punctuated by tariffs inflicted in both directions, and while U.S. consumers may soon feel the pinch of higher prices, a leading China expert says the communist regime in Beijing is suffering far more.
"China has a trade-dependent economy and we do not," said Gordon Chang, an East Asia policy expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China." "Last year, China's trade surplus with the U.S. accounted for 199.3 percent of it's overall merchandise surplus. That's incredible dependence on access to the U.S. market."
According to Chang, the U.S. needs to hammer China for anywhere between $150-600 billion to counter China's prolific theft of U.S. intellectual property, or IP.
Many free trade advocates, including those in President Trump's own party, agree that China is running roughshod over intellectual property rights but they contend Trump's approach will only result in higher costs for American consumers.
Chang agrees that Americans will feel some pain, but he believes it will be mild compared to the impact on China.
"Yes, these tariffs will hurt us but China, up to now, has been absorbing probably more of the cost of these tariffs than we have. So President Trump has been correct," said Chang, who warns the financial impact on American consumers will get more severe the longer the trade impasse continues.
"As he extends tariffs to all Chinese good, which could happen in the not-too-distant future, then the percentage borne by the United States will be higher for sure. But at some point, we have got to recognize that we cannot sustain the loss of all of this IP and that this is a critical threat to our economy and our society," said Chang.
But Chang insists if we're going to stop China's predatory practices, the U.S. must pursue this course.
"We've just got to realize that we cannot get out of decades of misguided trade policy with China and expect there will be no cost. There is a cost already and we're going to have to bear it in ways which are more obvious than in the past," said Chang.
Listen to the full podcast to hear whether no deal is better than a good deal with China for the foreseeable future and why Chang thinks Trump is making a big mistake in how he is dealing with China when it comes to the North Korean nuclear threat.NoHarvard Rescinds Kyle Kashuv's Admissionhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/kyle-kashuv-2019-06-17https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18300336Mon, 17 Jun 2019 20:26:54 +0000Radio AmericaHarvard University revoked the acceptance of Parkland survivor Kyle Kashuv over controversial remarks he made with friends, Henry Erlandson reports.75politics,harvard,parkland,kashuvcleanfullRadio AmericaHarvard University revoked the acceptance of Parkland survivor Kyle Kashuv over controversial remarks he made with friends, Henry Erlandson reports.NoIllinois: Abortion Now Legal for Any Reason or No Reason at Allhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/morrisonDemocrats billed the proposal as shoring up existing law over concern that the U.S. Supreme Court could soon reverse Roe v. Wade, but Republican State Rep. Tom Morrison says the legislation was far more sweeping than that, starting with how lawmakers view abortion.

"The most important thing it does is that it says that abortion is a fundamental right of women - actually not just women. The sponsor of the bill said anyone with a uterus and ovaries, so I guess that's not just women today as they would define it," said Morrison.

When it comes to specifics, Morrison says the expansion of abortion access is obvious.

"This bill was 126 pages long and expanded [permissiveness of abortion]. It removed clinic regulations. It removed provisions to have two doctors involved in a late-term abortion. There's a provision for non-physicians to do abortions up to a certain point," said Morrison.

According to Morrison, the bill also changes the definition of a viable unborn baby.

"It's now left up to what the doctor determines at the moment, rather than having two doctors agree on a case by case basis," said Morrison, who adds that the lone doctor can be the abortion provider and a late-term pregnancy can be considered non-viable simply because the baby would need to be flown to another facility for care in a neonatal intensive care unit, or NICU.

In addition, Morrison fears the legislation will be very dangerous for mothers who suffer complications from an abortion. He says the new law does not require a coroner to investigate the deaths of women who were patients at abortion clinics, essentially allowing those deaths to vanish into the wind.

Among the most controversial provisions is the provision to allow abortions at any stage of pregnancy, even when the child could survive outside of the mother. While supporters frequently refer to parents making the decision after discovering their child is severely deformed, Morrison says there's no mention of that issue in the bill.

In fact, Morrison says reasons like "familial health" are cited as reasons for an abortion at any stage.

"It could mean anything. It could mean financial health. It could mean mental health. It could mean a mother doesn't like stretch marks and that would impact her perception of her body image.

"It's totally up to interpretation. Maybe it it's that a family already has a boy and they want a girl, so they abort the child because the child isn't the sex that the couple wants. Maybe it's that sleep would be interrupted for someone in the family," said Morrison.

Morrison does believe the recent string of pro-life legislation banning abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected played a role in the pro-abortion legislation advancing in Illinois. He says momentum for aborting viable babies was pretty tepid before that.

"Even some of of the pro-choice legislators were reluctant to support those bills. Those southern states, as they moved forward on their bills and signed them into law, then the proponents in Illinois figured they had the green light to offer a counter to what was happening in those other states," said Morrison.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Morrison also explain how the new Illinois law could soon lead to the overturning of parental notification and consent laws for minors seeking abortions, how Illinois abortion providers are circumventing the ban on partial birth abortions and much more.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18275274Sat, 15 Jun 2019 01:02:39 +0000Radio AmericaIllinois now has perhaps the most permissive abortion laws in the nation after Democrats pushed an expansive new bill through the legislature and Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed it into law on Wednesday.
Democrats billed the proposal as shoring...Democrats billed the proposal as shoring up existing law over concern that the U.S. Supreme Court could soon reverse Roe v. Wade, but Republican State Rep. Tom Morrison says the legislation was far more sweeping than that, starting with how lawmakers view abortion.

"The most important thing it does is that it says that abortion is a fundamental right of women - actually not just women. The sponsor of the bill said anyone with a uterus and ovaries, so I guess that's not just women today as they would define it," said Morrison.

When it comes to specifics, Morrison says the expansion of abortion access is obvious.

"This bill was 126 pages long and expanded [permissiveness of abortion]. It removed clinic regulations. It removed provisions to have two doctors involved in a late-term abortion. There's a provision for non-physicians to do abortions up to a certain point," said Morrison.

According to Morrison, the bill also changes the definition of a viable unborn baby.

"It's now left up to what the doctor determines at the moment, rather than having two doctors agree on a case by case basis," said Morrison, who adds that the lone doctor can be the abortion provider and a late-term pregnancy can be considered non-viable simply because the baby would need to be flown to another facility for care in a neonatal intensive care unit, or NICU.

In addition, Morrison fears the legislation will be very dangerous for mothers who suffer complications from an abortion. He says the new law does not require a coroner to investigate the deaths of women who were patients at abortion clinics, essentially allowing those deaths to vanish into the wind.

Among the most controversial provisions is the provision to allow abortions at any stage of pregnancy, even when the child could survive outside of the mother. While supporters frequently refer to parents making the decision after discovering their child is severely deformed, Morrison says there's no mention of that issue in the bill.

In fact, Morrison says reasons like "familial health" are cited as reasons for an abortion at any stage.

"It could mean anything. It could mean financial health. It could mean mental health. It could mean a mother doesn't like stretch marks and that would impact her perception of her body image.

"It's totally up to interpretation. Maybe it it's that a family already has a boy and they want a girl, so they abort the child because the child isn't the sex that the couple wants. Maybe it's that sleep would be interrupted for someone in the family," said Morrison.

Morrison does believe the recent string of pro-life legislation banning abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected played a role in the pro-abortion legislation advancing in Illinois. He says momentum for aborting viable babies was pretty tepid before that.

"Even some of of the pro-choice legislators were reluctant to support those bills. Those southern states, as they moved forward on their bills and signed them into law, then the proponents in Illinois figured they had the green light to offer a counter to what was happening in those other states," said Morrison.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Morrison also explain how the new Illinois law could soon lead to the overturning of parental notification and consent laws for minors seeking abortions, how Illinois abortion providers are circumventing the ban on partial birth abortions and much more.]]>652news,health,abortion,illinois,viabilitycleanfullRadio AmericaIllinois now has perhaps the most permissive abortion laws in the nation after Democrats pushed an expansive new bill through the legislature and Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed it into law on Wednesday.
Democrats billed the proposal as shoring up existing law over concern that the U.S. Supreme Court could soon reverse Roe v. Wade, but Republican State Rep. Tom Morrison says the legislation was far more sweeping than that, starting with how lawmakers view abortion.
"The most important thing it does is that it says that abortion is a fundamental right of women - actually not just women. The sponsor of the bill said anyone with a uterus and ovaries, so I guess that's not just women today as they would define it," said Morrison.
When it comes to specifics, Morrison says the expansion of abortion access is obvious.
"This bill was 126 pages long and expanded [permissiveness of abortion]. It removed clinic regulations. It removed provisions to have two doctors involved in a late-term abortion. There's a provision for non-physicians to do abortions up to a certain point," said Morrison.
According to Morrison, the bill also changes the definition of a viable unborn baby.
"It's now left up to what the doctor determines at the moment, rather than having two doctors agree on a case by case basis," said Morrison, who adds that the lone doctor can be the abortion provider and a late-term pregnancy can be considered non-viable simply because the baby would need to be flown to another facility for care in a neonatal intensive care unit, or NICU.
In addition, Morrison fears the legislation will be very dangerous for mothers who suffer complications from an abortion. He says the new law does not require a coroner to investigate the deaths of women who were patients at abortion clinics, essentially allowing those deaths to vanish into the wind.
Among the most controversial provisions is the provision to allow abortions at any stage of pregnancy, even when the child could survive outside of the mother. While supporters frequently refer to parents making the decision after discovering their child is severely deformed, Morrison says there's no mention of that issue in the bill.
In fact, Morrison says reasons like "familial health" are cited as reasons for an abortion at any stage.
"It could mean anything. It could mean financial health. It could mean mental health. It could mean a mother doesn't like stretch marks and that would impact her perception of her body image.
"It's totally up to interpretation. Maybe it it's that a family already has a boy and they want a girl, so they abort the child because the child isn't the sex that the couple wants. Maybe it's that sleep would be interrupted for someone in the family," said Morrison.
Morrison does believe the recent string of pro-life legislation banning abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected played a role in the pro-abortion legislation advancing in Illinois. He says momentum for aborting viable babies was pretty tepid before that.
"Even some of of the pro-choice legislators were reluctant to support those bills. Those southern states, as they moved forward on their bills and signed them into law, then the proponents in Illinois figured they had the green light to offer a counter to what was happening in those other states," said Morrison.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Morrison also explain how the new Illinois law could soon lead to the overturning of parental notification and consent laws for minors seeking abortions, how Illinois abortion providers are circumventing the ban on partial birth abortions and much more.NoPresident Trump Stands By Conwayhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/conway-trumphttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18275289Fri, 14 Jun 2019 21:07:54 +0000Radio AmericaThe US Office of Special Council released a statement saying Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway should be fired for violating the Hatch Act. Donald Trump in an appearance on Fox and Friends disagrees. Montie Montgomery reports.67news,politics,trump,act,conway,hatchcleanfullRadio AmericaThe US Office of Special Council released a statement saying Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway should be fired for violating the Hatch Act. Donald Trump in an appearance on Fox and Friends disagrees. Montie Montgomery reports.NoBig Tech Targets Conservativeshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/okeefeA whistleblower reached out to Project Veritas to report that Live Action was inaccessible on Pinterest because it was included in the site's "porn domain," which blocks access to pornographic sites. When confronted with this obvious error, Pinterest removed Live Action from the porn domain.

But a short time later, Pinterest banned Live action altogether. That's because the whistleblower provided more information that Project Veritas promptly made public about how the site openly discriminated against Live Action.

"There was a conversation internally on a Slack thread, which is a text-messaging internal thread and the employee at Pinterest actually said that in the private messaging board [a Pinterest official] said, 'I've seen Live Action on there.'

"She basically said it shouldn't be on there but we're going to keep it on there. That proved that the executives at Pinterest knew that Live Action wasn't pornography but was putting it on the list anyway," said O'Keefe.

But the crackdown wasn't done. Project Veritas published a video highlighting that Pinterest was intentionally classifying Live Action incorrectly. Not only did Pinterest boot Live Action off the platform, but YouTube banned the video and Twitter suspended the Project Veritas account for publishing private information.

Right-leaning sites like PJ Media and Zero Hedge were also lumped in the porn domain.

O'Keefe calls this a watershed moment in which the major social media sites and "big tech" are no longer presenting themselves as champions of free speech but of a political and ideological agenda.

"The big tech companies have drawn a line in the sand. They're choosing to have an editorial agenda. they're no longer just big tech companies that have platforms. They're publishers. Now they're trying to stop and censor and prohibit the American people from having the information that'll wake them up, that'll shake them awake," said O'Keefe.

Listen to the full podcast to hear O'Keefe explain why he believes the big tech companies are actually more powerful than the three branches of government and far more powerful than the traditional media outlets of network and cable news and the major newspapers. He also details what he wants the tech companies to admit and why he finds it Orwellian that the tech crackdown on conservatives coincides with liberal politicians declaring that certain - including being pro-life - are no longer acceptable in public discourse.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18264628Fri, 14 Jun 2019 00:56:23 +0000Radio AmericaThe nation's largest technology giants are abandoning their positions as free speech advocates and actively taking sides to silence and punish conservatives, and Project Veritas President James O'Keefe says Pinterest's treatment of his group and the...A whistleblower reached out to Project Veritas to report that Live Action was inaccessible on Pinterest because it was included in the site's "porn domain," which blocks access to pornographic sites. When confronted with this obvious error, Pinterest removed Live Action from the porn domain.

But a short time later, Pinterest banned Live action altogether. That's because the whistleblower provided more information that Project Veritas promptly made public about how the site openly discriminated against Live Action.

"There was a conversation internally on a Slack thread, which is a text-messaging internal thread and the employee at Pinterest actually said that in the private messaging board [a Pinterest official] said, 'I've seen Live Action on there.'

"She basically said it shouldn't be on there but we're going to keep it on there. That proved that the executives at Pinterest knew that Live Action wasn't pornography but was putting it on the list anyway," said O'Keefe.

But the crackdown wasn't done. Project Veritas published a video highlighting that Pinterest was intentionally classifying Live Action incorrectly. Not only did Pinterest boot Live Action off the platform, but YouTube banned the video and Twitter suspended the Project Veritas account for publishing private information.

Right-leaning sites like PJ Media and Zero Hedge were also lumped in the porn domain.

O'Keefe calls this a watershed moment in which the major social media sites and "big tech" are no longer presenting themselves as champions of free speech but of a political and ideological agenda.

"The big tech companies have drawn a line in the sand. They're choosing to have an editorial agenda. they're no longer just big tech companies that have platforms. They're publishers. Now they're trying to stop and censor and prohibit the American people from having the information that'll wake them up, that'll shake them awake," said O'Keefe.

Listen to the full podcast to hear O'Keefe explain why he believes the big tech companies are actually more powerful than the three branches of government and far more powerful than the traditional media outlets of network and cable news and the major newspapers. He also details what he wants the tech companies to admit and why he finds it Orwellian that the tech crackdown on conservatives coincides with liberal politicians declaring that certain - including being pro-life - are no longer acceptable in public discourse.]]>734news,live,twitter,youtube,free,speech,action,pinterest,o'keefecleanfullRadio AmericaThe nation's largest technology giants are abandoning their positions as free speech advocates and actively taking sides to silence and punish conservatives, and Project Veritas President James O'Keefe says Pinterest's treatment of his group and the pro-life organization Live Action is the latest proof.
A whistleblower reached out to Project Veritas to report that Live Action was inaccessible on Pinterest because it was included in the site's "porn domain," which blocks access to pornographic sites. When confronted with this obvious error, Pinterest removed Live Action from the porn domain.
But a short time later, Pinterest banned Live action altogether. That's because the whistleblower provided more information that Project Veritas promptly made public about how the site openly discriminated against Live Action.
"There was a conversation internally on a Slack thread, which is a text-messaging internal thread and the employee at Pinterest actually said that in the private messaging board [a Pinterest official] said, 'I've seen Live Action on there.'
"She basically said it shouldn't be on there but we're going to keep it on there. That proved that the executives at Pinterest knew that Live Action wasn't pornography but was putting it on the list anyway," said O'Keefe.
But the crackdown wasn't done. Project Veritas published a video highlighting that Pinterest was intentionally classifying Live Action incorrectly. Not only did Pinterest boot Live Action off the platform, but YouTube banned the video and Twitter suspended the Project Veritas account for publishing private information.
Right-leaning sites like PJ Media and Zero Hedge were also lumped in the porn domain.
O'Keefe calls this a watershed moment in which the major social media sites and "big tech" are no longer presenting themselves as champions of free speech but of a political and ideological agenda.
"The big tech companies have drawn a line in the sand. They're choosing to have an editorial agenda. they're no longer just big tech companies that have platforms. They're publishers. Now they're trying to stop and censor and prohibit the American people from having the information that'll wake them up, that'll shake them awake," said O'Keefe.
Listen to the full podcast to hear O'Keefe explain why he believes the big tech companies are actually more powerful than the three branches of government and far more powerful than the traditional media outlets of network and cable news and the major newspapers. He also details what he wants the tech companies to admit and why he finds it Orwellian that the tech crackdown on conservatives coincides with liberal politicians declaring that certain - including being pro-life - are no longer acceptable in public discourse.NoRepublicans Rebuke Trump Campaign Commentshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/republican-response-2019-06-13https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18264794Thu, 13 Jun 2019 21:15:21 +0000Radio AmericaRepublicans denounce remarks from President Trump about foreign meddling, Henry Erlandson reports.69politics,trump,elections,republicanscleanfullRadio AmericaRepublicans denounce remarks from President Trump about foreign meddling, Henry Erlandson reports.NoUS Accuses Iran of Oil Tanker Attackshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/iran-oil-tankershttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18264722Thu, 13 Jun 2019 21:06:16 +0000Radio AmericaThe United States is accusing Iran of attacking two oil tankers Thursday. Montie Montgomery reports.65news,politics,oil,irancleanfullRadio AmericaThe United States is accusing Iran of attacking two oil tankers Thursday. Montie Montgomery reports.NoHigh Tension in Hong Konghttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/hong-kongWednesday's protests turned violent as local authorities lashed out at the demonstrators who succeeded in delaying a vote on extradition legislation.

"The Hong Kong government, at the prodding of Beijing, has proposed an extradition bill which would allow China to take people off the streets of Hong Kong in effect," said Gordon Chang, an East Asia policy expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China."

"Hong Kong right now has extradition agreements with twenty nations, not including China. The extradition bill would broaden that and that would give Beijing the ability really to bring Hong Kong to heel. As Hong Kong democrats say, this is the last stand of the city," added Chang.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Chang explain what Hong Kong will look like in the coming years if the extradition bill becomes law and which very powerful ally protesters have on their side.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18254160Wed, 12 Jun 2019 21:10:11 +0000Radio AmericaMore than a million people flooded the streets of Hong Kong on multiple occasions this week in an effort to derail legislation that opponents believe is the last chance to save the business hub from the clutches of the communist Chinese regime in...Wednesday's protests turned violent as local authorities lashed out at the demonstrators who succeeded in delaying a vote on extradition legislation.

"The Hong Kong government, at the prodding of Beijing, has proposed an extradition bill which would allow China to take people off the streets of Hong Kong in effect," said Gordon Chang, an East Asia policy expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China."

"Hong Kong right now has extradition agreements with twenty nations, not including China. The extradition bill would broaden that and that would give Beijing the ability really to bring Hong Kong to heel. As Hong Kong democrats say, this is the last stand of the city," added Chang.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Chang explain what Hong Kong will look like in the coming years if the extradition bill becomes law and which very powerful ally protesters have on their side.]]>450news,business,china,communism,repression,hongkongcleanfullRadio AmericaMore than a million people flooded the streets of Hong Kong on multiple occasions this week in an effort to derail legislation that opponents believe is the last chance to save the business hub from the clutches of the communist Chinese regime in Beijing.
Wednesday's protests turned violent as local authorities lashed out at the demonstrators who succeeded in delaying a vote on extradition legislation.
"The Hong Kong government, at the prodding of Beijing, has proposed an extradition bill which would allow China to take people off the streets of Hong Kong in effect," said Gordon Chang, an East Asia policy expert and author of "The Coming Collapse of China."
"Hong Kong right now has extradition agreements with twenty nations, not including China. The extradition bill would broaden that and that would give Beijing the ability really to bring Hong Kong to heel. As Hong Kong democrats say, this is the last stand of the city," added Chang.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Chang explain what Hong Kong will look like in the coming years if the extradition bill becomes law and which very powerful ally protesters have on their side.NoCongress Keeps Hogging the Moneyhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/pork-barrel-projects-2019-06-12https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18253290Wed, 12 Jun 2019 19:51:38 +0000Radio AmericaGovernment waste is on the rise. The 2019 Congressional Pig Book reveals hundreds of earmarks costing taxpayers billions, Henry Erlandson reports.81taxes,congress,budget,debt,earmarkscleanfullRadio AmericaGovernment waste is on the rise. The 2019 Congressional Pig Book reveals hundreds of earmarks costing taxpayers billions, Henry Erlandson reports.NoBrat Breaks Down Congresshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/bratWhat is the role of the Freedom Caucus in the new Congress? How does he respond to accusations that the Freedom Caucus is now more devoted to defending President Trump than promoting limited government?

In the podcast, Brat addresses all of these questions and also tells House Republicans what they need to start doing right now to improve their chances of being back in the majority after the 2020 elections.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18242769Tue, 11 Jun 2019 21:13:41 +0000Radio AmericaFormer Virginia Rep. Dave Brat is now thoroughly enjoying the private sector as dean of the business school at Liberty University. However, the prominent conservative and former member of the House Freedom Caucus has plenty to say about the first few...What is the role of the Freedom Caucus in the new Congress? How does he respond to accusations that the Freedom Caucus is now more devoted to defending President Trump than promoting limited government?

In the podcast, Brat addresses all of these questions and also tells House Republicans what they need to start doing right now to improve their chances of being back in the majority after the 2020 elections.]]>768news,freedom,republicans,caucuscleanfullRadio AmericaFormer Virginia Rep. Dave Brat is now thoroughly enjoying the private sector as dean of the business school at Liberty University. However, the prominent conservative and former member of the House Freedom Caucus has plenty to say about the first few months of this Congress.
What is the role of the Freedom Caucus in the new Congress? How does he respond to accusations that the Freedom Caucus is now more devoted to defending President Trump than promoting limited government?
In the podcast, Brat addresses all of these questions and also tells House Republicans what they need to start doing right now to improve their chances of being back in the majority after the 2020 elections.NoTrump Threatens China with New Tariffshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/china-tariffshttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18231178Mon, 10 Jun 2019 21:14:08 +0000Radio AmericaPresident Trump promised to impose an extra $300 billion in tariffs against China should President Xi Jinping not attend, Henry Erlandson reports.76trump,china,trade,tariffscleanfullRadio AmericaPresident Trump promised to impose an extra $300 billion in tariffs against China should President Xi Jinping not attend, Henry Erlandson reports.NoLiddy Explains Dean's Full Role in Watergatehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/gglDean became a hero on the political left for testifying against Nixon and his White House colleagues.

But what many Americans do not know, however, is how the plot started, what the plumbers were looking for in the DNC headquarter, why they got caught, and how the man lionized by liberals for breaking the scandal wide open actually deserves much of the blame.

The leader of the plumbers was G. Gordon Liddy, a former FBI special agent and official in the office of the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREEP). In 2012, while a talk show host and colleague of mine at the Radio America network, Liddy detailed how the road to the Watergate break-in began.

“I was down in the office of what came to be known as the plumbers. I was called by Egil Krogh, who was an assistant to John Ehrlichman, and he said, ‘(White House Counsel) John Dean wants to pitch you on something and I think I ought to be there.’ That’s because nobody trusted John Dean. So I went up to Dean’s office. He said that he wanted an intelligence operation to operate against the Democratic Party in the 1972 election,” said Liddy.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Liddy's explanation of Watergate and why he holds Dean in such low regard.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18231134Mon, 10 Jun 2019 21:08:55 +0000Radio AmericaOn Monday, former Nixon White House counsel John Dean testified before Congress about what he sees as troubling information in the Mueller Report and the parallels he sees between Watergate and Trump's actions concerning the Russian attempts to meddle...Dean became a hero on the political left for testifying against Nixon and his White House colleagues.

But what many Americans do not know, however, is how the plot started, what the plumbers were looking for in the DNC headquarter, why they got caught, and how the man lionized by liberals for breaking the scandal wide open actually deserves much of the blame.

The leader of the plumbers was G. Gordon Liddy, a former FBI special agent and official in the office of the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREEP). In 2012, while a talk show host and colleague of mine at the Radio America network, Liddy detailed how the road to the Watergate break-in began.

“I was down in the office of what came to be known as the plumbers. I was called by Egil Krogh, who was an assistant to John Ehrlichman, and he said, ‘(White House Counsel) John Dean wants to pitch you on something and I think I ought to be there.’ That’s because nobody trusted John Dean. So I went up to Dean’s office. He said that he wanted an intelligence operation to operate against the Democratic Party in the 1972 election,” said Liddy.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Liddy's explanation of Watergate and why he holds Dean in such low regard.]]>436news,dean,trump,nixon,watergatecleanfullRadio AmericaOn Monday, former Nixon White House counsel John Dean testified before Congress about what he sees as troubling information in the Mueller Report and the parallels he sees between Watergate and Trump's actions concerning the Russian attempts to meddle in the 2016 elections.
Dean became a hero on the political left for testifying against Nixon and his White House colleagues.
But what many Americans do not know, however, is how the plot started, what the plumbers were looking for in the DNC headquarter, why they got caught, and how the man lionized by liberals for breaking the scandal wide open actually deserves much of the blame.
The leader of the plumbers was G. Gordon Liddy, a former FBI special agent and official in the office of the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREEP). In 2012, while a talk show host and colleague of mine at the Radio America network, Liddy detailed how the road to the Watergate break-in began.
“I was down in the office of what came to be known as the plumbers. I was called by Egil Krogh, who was an assistant to John Ehrlichman, and he said, ‘(White House Counsel) John Dean wants to pitch you on something and I think I ought to be there.’ That’s because nobody trusted John Dean. So I went up to Dean’s office. He said that he wanted an intelligence operation to operate against the Democratic Party in the 1972 election,” said Liddy.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Liddy's explanation of Watergate and why he holds Dean in such low regard.NoMcConnell, Chao Hit with Corruption Allegationshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mcconnell-and-chaohttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18231056Mon, 10 Jun 2019 20:58:13 +0000Radio AmericaSenate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his wife, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, are facing scrutiny over charges of corruption concerning infrastructure grants and the 2020 election. Matt Fisher reports.88mitch,mcconnell,corruption,politicocleanfullRadio AmericaSenate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his wife, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, are facing scrutiny over charges of corruption concerning infrastructure grants and the 2020 election. Matt Fisher reports.NoNadler, DOJ Strike Deal for Mueller Documents; John Dean Testifieshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/doj-deal-with-nadler-john-dean-testifys-https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18230994Mon, 10 Jun 2019 20:51:47 +0000Radio AmericaHouse Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler reached an agreement with the Department of Justice regarding key documents in the Mueller report. Meanwhile, former Nixon White House Counsel John Dean testifies before Congress. Matt Fisher reports.77cleanfullRadio AmericaHouse Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler reached an agreement with the Department of Justice regarding key documents in the Mueller report. Meanwhile, former Nixon White House Counsel John Dean testifies before Congress. Matt Fisher reports.NoDems, Many GOP Reject Spending Cut Planhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/adam_1Early in the week, the Senate defeated a procedural motion on the so-called Pennies Plan, 69-22. All 43 Democrats present in the chamber opposed the plan. Among Republicans, 26 voted against the bill while 22 supported it. The plan would make an exception for Social Security expenditures. It also calls for making the Trump tax cuts permanent and expanding access to Health Savings Accounts.

OpentheBooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski is dismayed that a Republican-controlled Senate could not advance the Paul legislation, noting that cutting two cents on the dollar is far more modest than the five cents per dollar that President Trump advocates.

Andrzejewski says every penny that the government spends has a constituency and supportive lawmakers who will fight vigorously to save it. But with the nation now more than $22 trillion in debt, the current pace of deficit spending cannot be sustained, especially with the bankruptcy of Medicare and Social Security inching ever closer.

So where could we actually start to cut costs?

"Grant making in the federal agencies amounts to over $600 billion and it's a target-rich environment. To put that amount of money in perspective, that's nearly as much money at the Department of Defense on our military budget every single year," said Andrzejewski.

And while some grants are vital, Andrzejewski says millions are wasted on frivolous projects like one million dollars to Cornell University to find out where it hurts most to get stung by a bee or another million for NASA to address religious concerns if we discover extra-terrestrial life.

Listen to the full podcast to hear more of Andrzejewski's ideas for addressing bloated spending, including how much can be saved in Medicare and Social Security just by keeping track of who is dead.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18208248Fri, 07 Jun 2019 21:08:30 +0000Radio AmericaThe U.S. Senate overwhelmingly rejected Sen. Rand Paul's plan to cut spending by two percent per year over five years, with all Democrats present opposing the plan and a majority of Republicans in the chamber voting against it.
Early in the week, the...Early in the week, the Senate defeated a procedural motion on the so-called Pennies Plan, 69-22. All 43 Democrats present in the chamber opposed the plan. Among Republicans, 26 voted against the bill while 22 supported it. The plan would make an exception for Social Security expenditures. It also calls for making the Trump tax cuts permanent and expanding access to Health Savings Accounts.

OpentheBooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski is dismayed that a Republican-controlled Senate could not advance the Paul legislation, noting that cutting two cents on the dollar is far more modest than the five cents per dollar that President Trump advocates.

Andrzejewski says every penny that the government spends has a constituency and supportive lawmakers who will fight vigorously to save it. But with the nation now more than $22 trillion in debt, the current pace of deficit spending cannot be sustained, especially with the bankruptcy of Medicare and Social Security inching ever closer.

So where could we actually start to cut costs?

"Grant making in the federal agencies amounts to over $600 billion and it's a target-rich environment. To put that amount of money in perspective, that's nearly as much money at the Department of Defense on our military budget every single year," said Andrzejewski.

And while some grants are vital, Andrzejewski says millions are wasted on frivolous projects like one million dollars to Cornell University to find out where it hurts most to get stung by a bee or another million for NASA to address religious concerns if we discover extra-terrestrial life.

Listen to the full podcast to hear more of Andrzejewski's ideas for addressing bloated spending, including how much can be saved in Medicare and Social Security just by keeping track of who is dead.]]>640news,paul,debt,spendingcleanfullRadio AmericaThe U.S. Senate overwhelmingly rejected Sen. Rand Paul's plan to cut spending by two percent per year over five years, with all Democrats present opposing the plan and a majority of Republicans in the chamber voting against it.
Early in the week, the Senate defeated a procedural motion on the so-called Pennies Plan, 69-22. All 43 Democrats present in the chamber opposed the plan. Among Republicans, 26 voted against the bill while 22 supported it. The plan would make an exception for Social Security expenditures. It also calls for making the Trump tax cuts permanent and expanding access to Health Savings Accounts.
OpentheBooks.com CEO Adam Andrzejewski is dismayed that a Republican-controlled Senate could not advance the Paul legislation, noting that cutting two cents on the dollar is far more modest than the five cents per dollar that President Trump advocates.
Andrzejewski says every penny that the government spends has a constituency and supportive lawmakers who will fight vigorously to save it. But with the nation now more than $22 trillion in debt, the current pace of deficit spending cannot be sustained, especially with the bankruptcy of Medicare and Social Security inching ever closer.
So where could we actually start to cut costs?
"Grant making in the federal agencies amounts to over $600 billion and it's a target-rich environment. To put that amount of money in perspective, that's nearly as much money at the Department of Defense on our military budget every single year," said Andrzejewski.
And while some grants are vital, Andrzejewski says millions are wasted on frivolous projects like one million dollars to Cornell University to find out where it hurts most to get stung by a bee or another million for NASA to address religious concerns if we discover extra-terrestrial life.
Listen to the full podcast to hear more of Andrzejewski's ideas for addressing bloated spending, including how much can be saved in Medicare and Social Security just by keeping track of who is dead.NoNear Collision in the Pacifichttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/russia-us-warshipsMontie Montgomery reports.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18208442Fri, 07 Jun 2019 20:54:50 +0000Radio AmericaRussia and the United States are both disputing what happened when a their ships almost collided.
Montie Montgomery reports.Montie Montgomery reports.]]>62news,politics,russia,navycleanfullRadio AmericaRussia and the United States are both disputing what happened when a their ships almost collided.
Montie Montgomery reports.NoNortham & Guns: Sound Policy or Political Posturing?https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/freitas_3Earlier in the week, Northam called for seven specific items to be enacted, including universal background checks; a ban on assault weapons, bump stocks, and suppressors; an extreme risk protective order; re-instating of the on-gun-a-month law; requiring people to report lost or stolen firearms; and expanding local authority to regulate firearms - including in government buildings.

Northam's call comes just days after a disgruntled former municipal employee in Virginia Beach killed 12 people and wounded at least six others before being killed by police.

But GOP Delegate Nick Freitas does not believe Northam is approaching the issue with sincerity. Instead, Freitas thinks the governor is trying to improve his standing among voters following his notorious medical school yearbook scandal, in which a photo of one person in blackface and other in KKK garb appeared on Northam's personal page.

"Ever since his blackface and KKK robe scandal, everything he has done has been about trying to rejuvenate his political career. When it interferes in sound public policy, that's a real problem," said Freitas.

The Virginia Beach murderer legally purchased the handguns he used to shoot people in a government building, leading Freitas and other Northam critics wonder how Northam's policy demands would have made any difference in that horrific attack.

To the contrary, Freitas says Northam's agenda would Virginia citizens less safe.

"The whole reason why, in the United States, we value the individual's right to be able to protect themselves and if necessary to have a firearm to do so. It's because it actually makes a weaker person able to defend themselves from a stronger attacker.

"Every single one of these provisions they're now pushing out creates an environment where a law-abiding citizen is going to be put at a disadvantage to somebody that is not obeying the law," said Freitas.

Freitas says the narrow Republican majorities in the General Assembly will examine ways to make Virginians safer but that will not include the Northam agenda.

"We're going to use this as an opportunity to actually look at all of the data points - all of the information coming in surrounding this shooting - and figure out a way that we can actually make people safer. But we're certainly not going to succumb to this knee-jerk reaction by the governor to politicize a tragic event in order to rehabilitate his political career," said Freitas.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Freitas discuss whether there can ever be common ground on this issue and where Virginia Republicans can take action to increase safety for people in the commonwealth.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18197710Fri, 07 Jun 2019 02:11:07 +0000Radio AmericaVirginia Gov. Ralph Northam is calling a special session to push new gun laws in the wake of last week's deadly mass shooting in Virginia Beach, but a pro-second amendment lawmaker sees Northam's move more as an attempt to burnish his own image than...Earlier in the week, Northam called for seven specific items to be enacted, including universal background checks; a ban on assault weapons, bump stocks, and suppressors; an extreme risk protective order; re-instating of the on-gun-a-month law; requiring people to report lost or stolen firearms; and expanding local authority to regulate firearms - including in government buildings.

Northam's call comes just days after a disgruntled former municipal employee in Virginia Beach killed 12 people and wounded at least six others before being killed by police.

But GOP Delegate Nick Freitas does not believe Northam is approaching the issue with sincerity. Instead, Freitas thinks the governor is trying to improve his standing among voters following his notorious medical school yearbook scandal, in which a photo of one person in blackface and other in KKK garb appeared on Northam's personal page.

"Ever since his blackface and KKK robe scandal, everything he has done has been about trying to rejuvenate his political career. When it interferes in sound public policy, that's a real problem," said Freitas.

The Virginia Beach murderer legally purchased the handguns he used to shoot people in a government building, leading Freitas and other Northam critics wonder how Northam's policy demands would have made any difference in that horrific attack.

To the contrary, Freitas says Northam's agenda would Virginia citizens less safe.

"The whole reason why, in the United States, we value the individual's right to be able to protect themselves and if necessary to have a firearm to do so. It's because it actually makes a weaker person able to defend themselves from a stronger attacker.

"Every single one of these provisions they're now pushing out creates an environment where a law-abiding citizen is going to be put at a disadvantage to somebody that is not obeying the law," said Freitas.

Freitas says the narrow Republican majorities in the General Assembly will examine ways to make Virginians safer but that will not include the Northam agenda.

"We're going to use this as an opportunity to actually look at all of the data points - all of the information coming in surrounding this shooting - and figure out a way that we can actually make people safer. But we're certainly not going to succumb to this knee-jerk reaction by the governor to politicize a tragic event in order to rehabilitate his political career," said Freitas.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Freitas discuss whether there can ever be common ground on this issue and where Virginia Republicans can take action to increase safety for people in the commonwealth.]]>553news,guns,virginia,constitution,northamcleanfullRadio AmericaVirginia Gov. Ralph Northam is calling a special session to push new gun laws in the wake of last week's deadly mass shooting in Virginia Beach, but a pro-second amendment lawmaker sees Northam's move more as an attempt to burnish his own image than to seriously address incidents of deadly violence.
Earlier in the week, Northam called for seven specific items to be enacted, including universal background checks; a ban on assault weapons, bump stocks, and suppressors; an extreme risk protective order; re-instating of the on-gun-a-month law; requiring people to report lost or stolen firearms; and expanding local authority to regulate firearms - including in government buildings.
Northam's call comes just days after a disgruntled former municipal employee in Virginia Beach killed 12 people and wounded at least six others before being killed by police.
But GOP Delegate Nick Freitas does not believe Northam is approaching the issue with sincerity. Instead, Freitas thinks the governor is trying to improve his standing among voters following his notorious medical school yearbook scandal, in which a photo of one person in blackface and other in KKK garb appeared on Northam's personal page.
"Ever since his blackface and KKK robe scandal, everything he has done has been about trying to rejuvenate his political career. When it interferes in sound public policy, that's a real problem," said Freitas.
The Virginia Beach murderer legally purchased the handguns he used to shoot people in a government building, leading Freitas and other Northam critics wonder how Northam's policy demands would have made any difference in that horrific attack.
To the contrary, Freitas says Northam's agenda would Virginia citizens less safe.
"The whole reason why, in the United States, we value the individual's right to be able to protect themselves and if necessary to have a firearm to do so. It's because it actually makes a weaker person able to defend themselves from a stronger attacker.
"Every single one of these provisions they're now pushing out creates an environment where a law-abiding citizen is going to be put at a disadvantage to somebody that is not obeying the law," said Freitas.
Freitas says the narrow Republican majorities in the General Assembly will examine ways to make Virginians safer but that will not include the Northam agenda.
"We're going to use this as an opportunity to actually look at all of the data points - all of the information coming in surrounding this shooting - and figure out a way that we can actually make people safer. But we're certainly not going to succumb to this knee-jerk reaction by the governor to politicize a tragic event in order to rehabilitate his political career," said Freitas.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Freitas discuss whether there can ever be common ground on this issue and where Virginia Republicans can take action to increase safety for people in the commonwealth.NoPelosi Wants Trump in Jail, Not Impeachedhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/pelosi-trump-in-jailMontie Montgomery reports.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18197668Thu, 06 Jun 2019 20:56:30 +0000Radio AmericaHouse Speaker Nancy Pelosi told fellow Democrats that she'd rather see Trump behind bars-not Impeached.
Montie Montgomery reports.Montie Montgomery reports.]]>89news,report,politics,trump,pelosi,2020,impeachment,muellercleanfullRadio AmericaHouse Speaker Nancy Pelosi told fellow Democrats that she'd rather see Trump behind bars-not Impeached.
Montie Montgomery reports.NoBorder Apprehensions Reach Record Highshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/border-patrol-apprehensionshttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18197450Thu, 06 Jun 2019 20:41:27 +0000Radio AmericaIllegal immigration numbers are soaring: the number of border enforcement actions more than doubled in the past year. In May alone, more than 132,000 migrants were apprehended at the Southwest border. Julie Mitchell reports.116immigration,border,migrants,apprehensionscleanfullRadio AmericaIllegal immigration numbers are soaring: the number of border enforcement actions more than doubled in the past year. In May alone, more than 132,000 migrants were apprehended at the Southwest border. Julie Mitchell reports.NoHomelessness Skyrockets in Los Angeleshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/la-homelesness-riseshttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18197381Thu, 06 Jun 2019 20:30:21 +0000Radio AmericaThe homeless rate in the city of Los Angeles skyrocketed over the last year, leaving state and local officials frustrated at the precipitous rise. Matt Fisher reports.73la,homeless,housing,newsomcleanfullRadio AmericaThe homeless rate in the city of Los Angeles skyrocketed over the last year, leaving state and local officials frustrated at the precipitous rise. Matt Fisher reports.NoOne Killed, Over Twenty Injured in West Point Accidenthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/west-point_1https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18197116Thu, 06 Jun 2019 19:58:40 +0000Radio AmericaOne cadet was killed and more than twenty others were wounded after a military transport vehicle overturned near a U.S. Army training site Thursday morning, Henry Erlandson reports.69army,military,accident,cadet,usmacleanfullRadio AmericaOne cadet was killed and more than twenty others were wounded after a military transport vehicle overturned near a U.S. Army training site Thursday morning, Henry Erlandson reports.NoThe Magnitude of D-Dayhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/conner_1On June 6, the U.S. and our allies launched the allied invasion of Normandy known as D-Day. On that date, some 150,000 personnel attacked Nazi-occupied France from the skies, from the sea, and rushed ashore on five strategic beaches and neighboring cliffs to help free a continent from tyranny.

Today, only a tiny fraction of those veterans remain, but the magnitude of what they and their brothers in arms accomplished that day will forever reverberate through history.

So as Americans and our allies commemorate D-Day, what should we remember? Dr Thomas Conner teaches military history at Hillsdale College in Michigan and is author of "War and Remembrance: The Story of the American Battle Monuments Commission." He says it's hard to overstate the importance of taking the beaches and establishing another front in the European theater.

"It had to be successful for the Allies to get a foothold on the continent of Europe and begin driving the Germans back in on their own borders. The war ended in literally the ashes of Berlin, only eleven months after D-Day," said Conner.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Conner explain how the Allies pulled off such a massive mission while keeping the Nazis completely unprepared for it, how close U.S. commanders were to declaring the mission a failure, how American soldiers adapted to parachuting into the wrong places and facing much stiffer German defenses than expected on bloody Omaha Beach and elsewhere along the coast.

He also describes the powerful experience of visiting the U.S. cemetery above Omaha Beach.

"I've seen more grown men cry in Normandy than anyplace else I've ever been and the cemetery evokes that kind of response," said Conner. "The combination of the memorial but also the awareness that it is right in the center of the Omaha Beach battlefield is quite moving."]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18183210Wed, 05 Jun 2019 21:08:04 +0000Radio AmericaOn Thursday, millions of people will direct their eyes to ceremonies honoring the military operation that radically changed and greatly hastened the end of World War II - 75 years after it happened.
On June 6, the U.S. and our allies launched the...On June 6, the U.S. and our allies launched the allied invasion of Normandy known as D-Day. On that date, some 150,000 personnel attacked Nazi-occupied France from the skies, from the sea, and rushed ashore on five strategic beaches and neighboring cliffs to help free a continent from tyranny.

Today, only a tiny fraction of those veterans remain, but the magnitude of what they and their brothers in arms accomplished that day will forever reverberate through history.

So as Americans and our allies commemorate D-Day, what should we remember? Dr Thomas Conner teaches military history at Hillsdale College in Michigan and is author of "War and Remembrance: The Story of the American Battle Monuments Commission." He says it's hard to overstate the importance of taking the beaches and establishing another front in the European theater.

"It had to be successful for the Allies to get a foothold on the continent of Europe and begin driving the Germans back in on their own borders. The war ended in literally the ashes of Berlin, only eleven months after D-Day," said Conner.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Conner explain how the Allies pulled off such a massive mission while keeping the Nazis completely unprepared for it, how close U.S. commanders were to declaring the mission a failure, how American soldiers adapted to parachuting into the wrong places and facing much stiffer German defenses than expected on bloody Omaha Beach and elsewhere along the coast.

He also describes the powerful experience of visiting the U.S. cemetery above Omaha Beach.

"I've seen more grown men cry in Normandy than anyplace else I've ever been and the cemetery evokes that kind of response," said Conner. "The combination of the memorial but also the awareness that it is right in the center of the Omaha Beach battlefield is quite moving."]]>748france,nazis,wwii,d-day,normandy,alliescleanfullRadio AmericaOn Thursday, millions of people will direct their eyes to ceremonies honoring the military operation that radically changed and greatly hastened the end of World War II - 75 years after it happened.
On June 6, the U.S. and our allies launched the allied invasion of Normandy known as D-Day. On that date, some 150,000 personnel attacked Nazi-occupied France from the skies, from the sea, and rushed ashore on five strategic beaches and neighboring cliffs to help free a continent from tyranny.
Today, only a tiny fraction of those veterans remain, but the magnitude of what they and their brothers in arms accomplished that day will forever reverberate through history.
So as Americans and our allies commemorate D-Day, what should we remember? Dr Thomas Conner teaches military history at Hillsdale College in Michigan and is author of "War and Remembrance: The Story of the American Battle Monuments Commission." He says it's hard to overstate the importance of taking the beaches and establishing another front in the European theater.
"It had to be successful for the Allies to get a foothold on the continent of Europe and begin driving the Germans back in on their own borders. The war ended in literally the ashes of Berlin, only eleven months after D-Day," said Conner.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Conner explain how the Allies pulled off such a massive mission while keeping the Nazis completely unprepared for it, how close U.S. commanders were to declaring the mission a failure, how American soldiers adapted to parachuting into the wrong places and facing much stiffer German defenses than expected on bloody Omaha Beach and elsewhere along the coast.
He also describes the powerful experience of visiting the U.S. cemetery above Omaha Beach.
"I've seen more grown men cry in Normandy than anyplace else I've ever been and the cemetery evokes that kind of response," said Conner. "The combination of the memorial but also the awareness that it is right in the center of the Omaha Beach battlefield is quite moving."NoThe Inequality of the Equality Acthttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/kaoEmilie Kao directs the Devos Center for Religion and Civil Society at the Heritage Foundation. She says the Equality Act actually leads to more inequality.

"We don't think anybody should be discriminated against simply because they are gay or transgender. Everyone should be treated with respect. But the problem with the Equality Act is that it doesn't treat everyone with respect. It basically codifies ideologies about sexual orientation and sex differences into civil rights law. That will lead to the punishment of people who don't agree with those viewpoints," said Kao.

Kao says the bill would lead to an erosion of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and parental rights.

To begin, the Equality Act would trump the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, meaning wedding vendors such as bakers and florists who feel servicing a same-sex wedding would violate their consciences would not be able to cite their sincerely-held religious beliefs when sued under this law.

Kao says it would also strip legal protections for people who simply disagree with same-sex marriage or the transgender agenda. She says teachers have been fired for refusing to use the preferred pronouns of a student identifying as a different gender and hospitals have been targeted for refusing to perform gender reassignment surgery.

According to Kao, the Equality Act would also gut parental rights. And she cited a transgender case in Ohio as a preview for what the Equality Act would do nationwide.

"A Catholic family lost custody of their daughter when the Cincinnati Children's Hospital said that she should be taking testosterone for gender dysphoria. When the parents disagreed, the state charged the parents with child abuse and a judge terminated their custody," said Kao.

Parents would also find themselves powerless in confronting an increasingly activist curriculum on these matters.

"In many cases, the parents are not even informed that children as young as kindergarten are being read stories in which they are told something that is a fallacy, which is that a person can transition from one sex to the other sex," said Kao.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Kao explain how the Equality Act would lead to greater inequality and why the promoters of the legislation are determined to criminalize those who disagree with their agenda.

She says there is a lot more at stake here than most Americans realize.

"I think what people should be aware of is the endangerment of religious freedom - it's already happening at the state level - the endangerment of parental rights, and the endangerment of women and girls' safety and privacy, not to mention fairness in sports," she said.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18172854Wed, 05 Jun 2019 01:29:29 +0000Radio AmericaEarlier this year, the House of Representatives passed the Equality Act. Supporters say they want to add anti-discrimination protections for sexual orientation and gender identity similar to the existing provisions for people based on sex, race,...Emilie Kao directs the Devos Center for Religion and Civil Society at the Heritage Foundation. She says the Equality Act actually leads to more inequality.

"We don't think anybody should be discriminated against simply because they are gay or transgender. Everyone should be treated with respect. But the problem with the Equality Act is that it doesn't treat everyone with respect. It basically codifies ideologies about sexual orientation and sex differences into civil rights law. That will lead to the punishment of people who don't agree with those viewpoints," said Kao.

Kao says the bill would lead to an erosion of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and parental rights.

To begin, the Equality Act would trump the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, meaning wedding vendors such as bakers and florists who feel servicing a same-sex wedding would violate their consciences would not be able to cite their sincerely-held religious beliefs when sued under this law.

Kao says it would also strip legal protections for people who simply disagree with same-sex marriage or the transgender agenda. She says teachers have been fired for refusing to use the preferred pronouns of a student identifying as a different gender and hospitals have been targeted for refusing to perform gender reassignment surgery.

According to Kao, the Equality Act would also gut parental rights. And she cited a transgender case in Ohio as a preview for what the Equality Act would do nationwide.

"A Catholic family lost custody of their daughter when the Cincinnati Children's Hospital said that she should be taking testosterone for gender dysphoria. When the parents disagreed, the state charged the parents with child abuse and a judge terminated their custody," said Kao.

Parents would also find themselves powerless in confronting an increasingly activist curriculum on these matters.

"In many cases, the parents are not even informed that children as young as kindergarten are being read stories in which they are told something that is a fallacy, which is that a person can transition from one sex to the other sex," said Kao.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Kao explain how the Equality Act would lead to greater inequality and why the promoters of the legislation are determined to criminalize those who disagree with their agenda.

She says there is a lot more at stake here than most Americans realize.

"I think what people should be aware of is the endangerment of religious freedom - it's already happening at the state level - the endangerment of parental rights, and the endangerment of women and girls' safety and privacy, not to mention fairness in sports," she said.]]>722news,religion,lgbt,freedom,congress,equality,actcleanfullRadio AmericaEarlier this year, the House of Representatives passed the Equality Act. Supporters say they want to add anti-discrimination protections for sexual orientation and gender identity similar to the existing provisions for people based on sex, race, ethnicity, and religion. However, critics contend the legislation would ramp up inequality for Americans who do not agree with the LGBT agenda.
Emilie Kao directs the Devos Center for Religion and Civil Society at the Heritage Foundation. She says the Equality Act actually leads to more inequality.
"We don't think anybody should be discriminated against simply because they are gay or transgender. Everyone should be treated with respect. But the problem with the Equality Act is that it doesn't treat everyone with respect. It basically codifies ideologies about sexual orientation and sex differences into civil rights law. That will lead to the punishment of people who don't agree with those viewpoints," said Kao.
Kao says the bill would lead to an erosion of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and parental rights.
To begin, the Equality Act would trump the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, meaning wedding vendors such as bakers and florists who feel servicing a same-sex wedding would violate their consciences would not be able to cite their sincerely-held religious beliefs when sued under this law.
Kao says it would also strip legal protections for people who simply disagree with same-sex marriage or the transgender agenda. She says teachers have been fired for refusing to use the preferred pronouns of a student identifying as a different gender and hospitals have been targeted for refusing to perform gender reassignment surgery.
According to Kao, the Equality Act would also gut parental rights. And she cited a transgender case in Ohio as a preview for what the Equality Act would do nationwide.
"A Catholic family lost custody of their daughter when the Cincinnati Children's Hospital said that she should be taking testosterone for gender dysphoria. When the parents disagreed, the state charged the parents with child abuse and a judge terminated their custody," said Kao.
Parents would also find themselves powerless in confronting an increasingly activist curriculum on these matters.
"In many cases, the parents are not even informed that children as young as kindergarten are being read stories in which they are told something that is a fallacy, which is that a person can transition from one sex to the other sex," said Kao.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Kao explain how the Equality Act would lead to greater inequality and why the promoters of the legislation are determined to criminalize those who disagree with their agenda.
She says there is a lot more at stake here than most Americans realize.
"I think what people should be aware of is the endangerment of religious freedom - it's already happening at the state level - the endangerment of parental rights, and the endangerment of women and girls' safety and privacy, not to mention fairness in sports," she said.NoManafort Heading to Rikershttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/manaforthttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18172709Tue, 04 Jun 2019 20:46:21 +0000Radio AmericaA New York State judge has ordered former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort to be transferred to New York Cities Rikers Island. Monite Montgomery has more.43news,politics,nyc,manafort,rikerscleanfullRadio AmericaA New York State judge has ordered former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort to be transferred to New York Cities Rikers Island. Monite Montgomery has more.NoTrump and Mayor of London Feudhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/trump-in-ukhttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18162832Mon, 03 Jun 2019 21:53:12 +0000Radio AmericaPresident Donald Trump and London Mayor Sadiq Khan are engaged in a war of words. Montie Montgomery has more.55london,politics,trump,mayorcleanfullRadio AmericaPresident Donald Trump and London Mayor Sadiq Khan are engaged in a war of words. Montie Montgomery has more.NoHow the Right Plans to Reverse Roehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/gannam1Last week, the justices upheld an Indiana law requiring the burial or cremation of fetal remains but refused to hear arguments on whether abortions based on sex, race, or disability ought to be legal. Indiana banned such abortions but a federal appeals court struck down the ban.

In this podcast, Roger Gannam of Liberty Counsel joins me to react to those decisions and to explain the delicate legal approach pro-life forces are charting - as they try to reverse Roe v. Wade without getting too aggressive and risking another legal precedent against their efforts.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18162685Mon, 03 Jun 2019 21:12:45 +0000Radio AmericaLiberals are convinced that the Supreme Court is on the brink of striking down Roe v. Wade and many pro-life figures hope that's the case. However, recent rulings from the court have surprised both sides.
Last week, the justices upheld an Indiana...Last week, the justices upheld an Indiana law requiring the burial or cremation of fetal remains but refused to hear arguments on whether abortions based on sex, race, or disability ought to be legal. Indiana banned such abortions but a federal appeals court struck down the ban.

In this podcast, Roger Gannam of Liberty Counsel joins me to react to those decisions and to explain the delicate legal approach pro-life forces are charting - as they try to reverse Roe v. Wade without getting too aggressive and risking another legal precedent against their efforts.]]>456news,court,abortion,supreme,roecleanfullRadio AmericaLiberals are convinced that the Supreme Court is on the brink of striking down Roe v. Wade and many pro-life figures hope that's the case. However, recent rulings from the court have surprised both sides.
Last week, the justices upheld an Indiana law requiring the burial or cremation of fetal remains but refused to hear arguments on whether abortions based on sex, race, or disability ought to be legal. Indiana banned such abortions but a federal appeals court struck down the ban.
In this podcast, Roger Gannam of Liberty Counsel joins me to react to those decisions and to explain the delicate legal approach pro-life forces are charting - as they try to reverse Roe v. Wade without getting too aggressive and risking another legal precedent against their efforts.NoNew Documents Raise Questions over FBI's Handling of Clinton Investigationhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/new-fbi-docs-shed-light-on-clinton-inveshttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18162603Mon, 03 Jun 2019 20:53:40 +0000Radio AmericaNew documents obtained by Judicial Watch reveal new information regarding the FBI's investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server and raise questions regarding the agency's handling of the matter. Matt Fisher...86justice,clinton,fbi,hillarycleanfullRadio AmericaNew documents obtained by Judicial Watch reveal new information regarding the FBI's investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server and raise questions regarding the agency's handling of the matter. Matt Fisher reports for Radio America.NoHow to Protect Our Electionshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/paytonThis influence is nothing new but in the digital age the depth and breadth of this meddling takes on even greater scope.

"Mueller's warning is spot on, not just for America, (but) for all democratic elections around the globe," said Theresa Payton, who served as White House Chief Information Officer for President George W. Bush.

In the podcast, Payton explains how these bad actors not only hack and disseminate private information but also target impressionable voters through social media campaigns. Payton also tells us what's being done to prevent those efforts from succeeding in 2020, how to spot suspicious activity, and what to do about it. And she explains how U.S. foreign policy ought to address the problem.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18126624Thu, 30 May 2019 21:25:12 +0000Radio AmericaWhile the political uproar continues following former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's statement on Wednesday, little attention is being paid to his most important point: that other nations and other adversaries are trying to impact our voters and our...This influence is nothing new but in the digital age the depth and breadth of this meddling takes on even greater scope.

"Mueller's warning is spot on, not just for America, (but) for all democratic elections around the globe," said Theresa Payton, who served as White House Chief Information Officer for President George W. Bush.

In the podcast, Payton explains how these bad actors not only hack and disseminate private information but also target impressionable voters through social media campaigns. Payton also tells us what's being done to prevent those efforts from succeeding in 2020, how to spot suspicious activity, and what to do about it. And she explains how U.S. foreign policy ought to address the problem.]]>949news,elections,russia,2020,2016,protecting,muellercleanfullRadio AmericaWhile the political uproar continues following former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's statement on Wednesday, little attention is being paid to his most important point: that other nations and other adversaries are trying to impact our voters and our elections.
This influence is nothing new but in the digital age the depth and breadth of this meddling takes on even greater scope.
"Mueller's warning is spot on, not just for America, (but) for all democratic elections around the globe," said Theresa Payton, who served as White House Chief Information Officer for President George W. Bush.
In the podcast, Payton explains how these bad actors not only hack and disseminate private information but also target impressionable voters through social media campaigns. Payton also tells us what's being done to prevent those efforts from succeeding in 2020, how to spot suspicious activity, and what to do about it. And she explains how U.S. foreign policy ought to address the problem.NoFormer Senator Thad Cochran Dieshttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/thad-cochranhttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18127104Thu, 30 May 2019 21:04:14 +0000Radio AmericaFormer Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran died at the age of 81 Thursday. Montie Montgomery has more.61news,politics,senate,thad,cochrancleanfullRadio AmericaFormer Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran died at the age of 81 Thursday. Montie Montgomery has more.NoTrump Fires Back at Muellerhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/trump-bashes-muellerhttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18126985Thu, 30 May 2019 20:50:59 +0000Radio AmericaPresident Trump ripped former special prosecutor Robert Mueller for his handling of the Russia investigation and called into question his qualifications to lead such an investigation. Meanwhile, Democrats made clear all options are on the table after...87trump,russia,2020,muellercleanfullRadio AmericaPresident Trump ripped former special prosecutor Robert Mueller for his handling of the Russia investigation and called into question his qualifications to lead such an investigation. Meanwhile, Democrats made clear all options are on the table after Mueller reiterated he could not prosecute Trump or clear him on obstruction of justice charges. Matt Fisher reports.NoHear Mueller's Full Statementhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/muellerstatementThe media is spending a lot of time analyzing Mueller's comments. Now you can hear everything Mueller said. Here is the entirety of his public statement Wednesday.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18116754Thu, 30 May 2019 01:00:50 +0000Radio AmericaOn Wednesday, Special Counsel Robert Mueller announced his job was done and insisted the report he submitted last month serves as his testimony on Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 campaign. He reiterated his conclusion that there was no...The media is spending a lot of time analyzing Mueller's comments. Now you can hear everything Mueller said. Here is the entirety of his public statement Wednesday.]]>567cleanfullRadio AmericaOn Wednesday, Special Counsel Robert Mueller announced his job was done and insisted the report he submitted last month serves as his testimony on Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 campaign. He reiterated his conclusion that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia but also said he could not exonerate Trump on allegations of obstruction of justice.
The media is spending a lot of time analyzing Mueller's comments. Now you can hear everything Mueller said. Here is the entirety of his public statement Wednesday.NoMcCarthy Breaks Down Mueller Statementhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/mccarthy_7President Trump and his allies exulted that Mueller repeatedly insisted the report he issued in April serves as his full testimony and that he didn't want to distract from that. But Democrats are seizing on two parts of the statement as fuel for impeachment - both related to Mueller's refusal to exonerate or indict Trump for obstruction of justice.

"If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so," said Mueller.

Mueller further stated that he was constitutionally barred from indicting Trump due to a long-established policy from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, or OLC .

"It explains that under longstanding department policy , a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional," said Mueller.

Mueller's pronouncement that OLC policy precludes him from charging Trump flies in the face of testimony from Attorney General William Barr, who stated that Mueller told him and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein that he was not relying on the OLC precedent in refusing to make a decision on obstruction charges.

McCarthy, who served as Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, says both men may be telling the truth. He says Barr is referring to a March meeting with Mueller that took place weeks before the Mueller report was submitted to the Justice Department.

"It was at that meeting that Mueller first alerted the attorney general, the deputy attorney general and others that he was not going to make a decision on obstruction. I think it was at that point that Barr asked him - and he said that Mueller was emphatic on this - whether the OLC guidance was the rationale for not making a decision and Mueller evidently said no, that that was not the reason," said McCarthy, who suspects Mueller changed his mind on the basis for the rationale during the intervening weeks.

Nonetheless, McCarthy says House Democrats now have more ammunition to push further down the road to impeachment, even though key leaders are not calling for that yet.

"He doesn't want to testify, but he did give Democrats as much as they could hope for from his testimony, I think, by saying, 'If I thought there was no crime here, I would've said so,' and it's up to you Democrats who run Congress to decide what to do about it," said McCarthy.

Listen to the full podcast to hear McCarthy's fascinating dissection of how Mueller and Barr appear to differ on what is required for a president to obstruct justice, whether Trump's worst impulses are criminal even if his subordinates did not obey him, and much more.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18116450Wed, 29 May 2019 21:08:18 +0000Radio AmericaSpecial Counsel Robert Mueller stepped down Wednesday saying the work of his team is done. And while partisans on all sides latched on to different comments from Mueller's statement, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy says Democrats got...President Trump and his allies exulted that Mueller repeatedly insisted the report he issued in April serves as his full testimony and that he didn't want to distract from that. But Democrats are seizing on two parts of the statement as fuel for impeachment - both related to Mueller's refusal to exonerate or indict Trump for obstruction of justice.

"If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so," said Mueller.

Mueller further stated that he was constitutionally barred from indicting Trump due to a long-established policy from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, or OLC .

"It explains that under longstanding department policy , a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional," said Mueller.

Mueller's pronouncement that OLC policy precludes him from charging Trump flies in the face of testimony from Attorney General William Barr, who stated that Mueller told him and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein that he was not relying on the OLC precedent in refusing to make a decision on obstruction charges.

McCarthy, who served as Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, says both men may be telling the truth. He says Barr is referring to a March meeting with Mueller that took place weeks before the Mueller report was submitted to the Justice Department.

"It was at that meeting that Mueller first alerted the attorney general, the deputy attorney general and others that he was not going to make a decision on obstruction. I think it was at that point that Barr asked him - and he said that Mueller was emphatic on this - whether the OLC guidance was the rationale for not making a decision and Mueller evidently said no, that that was not the reason," said McCarthy, who suspects Mueller changed his mind on the basis for the rationale during the intervening weeks.

Nonetheless, McCarthy says House Democrats now have more ammunition to push further down the road to impeachment, even though key leaders are not calling for that yet.

"He doesn't want to testify, but he did give Democrats as much as they could hope for from his testimony, I think, by saying, 'If I thought there was no crime here, I would've said so,' and it's up to you Democrats who run Congress to decide what to do about it," said McCarthy.

Listen to the full podcast to hear McCarthy's fascinating dissection of how Mueller and Barr appear to differ on what is required for a president to obstruct justice, whether Trump's worst impulses are criminal even if his subordinates did not obey him, and much more.]]>915cleanfullRadio AmericaSpecial Counsel Robert Mueller stepped down Wednesday saying the work of his team is done. And while partisans on all sides latched on to different comments from Mueller's statement, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy says Democrats got everything they could have reasonably hoped for.
President Trump and his allies exulted that Mueller repeatedly insisted the report he issued in April serves as his full testimony and that he didn't want to distract from that. But Democrats are seizing on two parts of the statement as fuel for impeachment - both related to Mueller's refusal to exonerate or indict Trump for obstruction of justice.
"If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so," said Mueller.
Mueller further stated that he was constitutionally barred from indicting Trump due to a long-established policy from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, or OLC .
"It explains that under longstanding department policy , a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional," said Mueller.
Mueller's pronouncement that OLC policy precludes him from charging Trump flies in the face of testimony from Attorney General William Barr, who stated that Mueller told him and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein that he was not relying on the OLC precedent in refusing to make a decision on obstruction charges.
McCarthy, who served as Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, says both men may be telling the truth. He says Barr is referring to a March meeting with Mueller that took place weeks before the Mueller report was submitted to the Justice Department.
"It was at that meeting that Mueller first alerted the attorney general, the deputy attorney general and others that he was not going to make a decision on obstruction. I think it was at that point that Barr asked him - and he said that Mueller was emphatic on this - whether the OLC guidance was the rationale for not making a decision and Mueller evidently said no, that that was not the reason," said McCarthy, who suspects Mueller changed his mind on the basis for the rationale during the intervening weeks.
Nonetheless, McCarthy says House Democrats now have more ammunition to push further down the road to impeachment, even though key leaders are not calling for that yet.
"He doesn't want to testify, but he did give Democrats as much as they could hope for from his testimony, I think, by saying, 'If I thought there was no crime here, I would've said so,' and it's up to you Democrats who run Congress to decide what to do about it," said McCarthy.
Listen to the full podcast to hear McCarthy's fascinating dissection of how Mueller and Barr appear to differ on what is required for a president to obstruct justice, whether Trump's worst impulses are criminal even if his subordinates did not obey him, and much more.NoDem 2020 Hopefuls Respond to Muellerhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/muller-reporthttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18116358Wed, 29 May 2019 20:33:32 +0000Radio AmericaDemocratic presidential candidates are responding to Robert Mueller's press conference on Wednesday. Montie Montgomery has more.642020,mueller,muellerreportcleanfullRadio AmericaDemocratic presidential candidates are responding to Robert Mueller's press conference on Wednesday. Montie Montgomery has more.NoWhen God Called 'The Shot Caller'https://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/diazThat's the bleak beginning to Casey's life but it also sets the stage for his dramatic transformation, which he recounts in the new book "The Shot CallerCasey's life appeared hopeless. He was staring at a long prison sentence that he had no qualms about serving because it was expected of gang members. He was thoroughly unrepentant.

Then Frances Proctor walked in his prison. Proctor was a tiny lady from a nearby Baptist church who faithfully came to pray for and evangelize the prisoners. Corrections officers told her she would be wasting her time on Casey Diaz.

Proctor didn't listen to them.

At first, Casey politely told Proctor he wasn't interested in her message.

"She had the boldness of a lion. I remember her telling me, 'I'm going to pray for you and Jesus is going to use you,'" said Diaz, who is author of "The Shot Caller," which tells the story of his dramatic conversion.

For the next 18 months, Proctor visited Diaz once a month and assured him each time she was praying for him.

"I would spend maybe two to four minutes with her and she was just giving me the love of Christ and talking to me," said Diaz, who says Proctor's intercessory prayers led to him surrendering his life to Jesus one night in his cell.

"There was something so authentic about her concern for inmates in there and for some reason she just zeroed in on my life," said Diaz.

Listen to the full podcast to hear how Casey's life changed after that, how he soon became a target in prison, how he connected with Proctor after getting out of prison, and what he thinks are the best ways to reduce gang violence.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18105255Tue, 28 May 2019 20:57:55 +0000Radio AmericaFrom the time he was a young boy, Casey Diaz watched his father assault his mother on a regular basis. He witnessed a triple homicide by the time he was eight. By age eleven he was in a Los Angeles-area gang and five years later he was a gang leader...That's the bleak beginning to Casey's life but it also sets the stage for his dramatic transformation, which he recounts in the new book "The Shot CallerCasey's life appeared hopeless. He was staring at a long prison sentence that he had no qualms about serving because it was expected of gang members. He was thoroughly unrepentant.

Then Frances Proctor walked in his prison. Proctor was a tiny lady from a nearby Baptist church who faithfully came to pray for and evangelize the prisoners. Corrections officers told her she would be wasting her time on Casey Diaz.

Proctor didn't listen to them.

At first, Casey politely told Proctor he wasn't interested in her message.

"She had the boldness of a lion. I remember her telling me, 'I'm going to pray for you and Jesus is going to use you,'" said Diaz, who is author of "The Shot Caller," which tells the story of his dramatic conversion.

For the next 18 months, Proctor visited Diaz once a month and assured him each time she was praying for him.

"I would spend maybe two to four minutes with her and she was just giving me the love of Christ and talking to me," said Diaz, who says Proctor's intercessory prayers led to him surrendering his life to Jesus one night in his cell.

"There was something so authentic about her concern for inmates in there and for some reason she just zeroed in on my life," said Diaz.

Listen to the full podcast to hear how Casey's life changed after that, how he soon became a target in prison, how he connected with Proctor after getting out of prison, and what he thinks are the best ways to reduce gang violence.]]>912news,christianity,violence,casey,gangs,diazcleanfullRadio AmericaFrom the time he was a young boy, Casey Diaz watched his father assault his mother on a regular basis. He witnessed a triple homicide by the time he was eight. By age eleven he was in a Los Angeles-area gang and five years later he was a gang leader on his way to prison for killing a rival gang member.
That's the bleak beginning to Casey's life but it also sets the stage for his dramatic transformation, which he recounts in the new book "The Shot CallerCasey's life appeared hopeless. He was staring at a long prison sentence that he had no qualms about serving because it was expected of gang members. He was thoroughly unrepentant.
Then Frances Proctor walked in his prison. Proctor was a tiny lady from a nearby Baptist church who faithfully came to pray for and evangelize the prisoners. Corrections officers told her she would be wasting her time on Casey Diaz.
Proctor didn't listen to them.
At first, Casey politely told Proctor he wasn't interested in her message.
"She had the boldness of a lion. I remember her telling me, 'I'm going to pray for you and Jesus is going to use you,'" said Diaz, who is author of "The Shot Caller," which tells the story of his dramatic conversion.
For the next 18 months, Proctor visited Diaz once a month and assured him each time she was praying for him.
"I would spend maybe two to four minutes with her and she was just giving me the love of Christ and talking to me," said Diaz, who says Proctor's intercessory prayers led to him surrendering his life to Jesus one night in his cell.
"There was something so authentic about her concern for inmates in there and for some reason she just zeroed in on my life," said Diaz.
Listen to the full podcast to hear how Casey's life changed after that, how he soon became a target in prison, how he connected with Proctor after getting out of prison, and what he thinks are the best ways to reduce gang violence.NoGold Star Widow's Story of Sacrificehttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/palmerOn Sunday at the National Memorial Day Concert, viewers will see and hear the story of Ursula Palmer. Palmer's husband, U.S. Army National Guard SFC Collin J. Bowen, was severely injured by an IED in Afghanistan in January 2008. He died from his injuries two months later.

Listen to Ursula describe the kind of man her husband was, what it was like to get the news of his injuries, and how she views his service today.

The National Memorial Day Concert airs live Sunday at 8 p.m. ET on PBS.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18069055Fri, 24 May 2019 22:53:44 +0000Radio AmericaMemorial Day is a time to remember those who gave their lives in defense of our nation and our freedoms and it's also a time to honor the family members still feeling the pain of those losses.
On Sunday at the National Memorial Day Concert, viewers...On Sunday at the National Memorial Day Concert, viewers will see and hear the story of Ursula Palmer. Palmer's husband, U.S. Army National Guard SFC Collin J. Bowen, was severely injured by an IED in Afghanistan in January 2008. He died from his injuries two months later.

Listen to Ursula describe the kind of man her husband was, what it was like to get the news of his injuries, and how she views his service today.

The National Memorial Day Concert airs live Sunday at 8 p.m. ET on PBS.]]>384news,day,star,gold,memorialcleanfullRadio AmericaMemorial Day is a time to remember those who gave their lives in defense of our nation and our freedoms and it's also a time to honor the family members still feeling the pain of those losses.
On Sunday at the National Memorial Day Concert, viewers will see and hear the story of Ursula Palmer. Palmer's husband, U.S. Army National Guard SFC Collin J. Bowen, was severely injured by an IED in Afghanistan in January 2008. He died from his injuries two months later.
Listen to Ursula describe the kind of man her husband was, what it was like to get the news of his injuries, and how she views his service today.
The National Memorial Day Concert airs live Sunday at 8 p.m. ET on PBS.NoBrexit Failure Buries Mayhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/gardinerMay took office in 2016 in the wake of British voters approving Brexit. Prime Minister David Cameron immediately stepped down after vigorously leading the effort to defeat Brexit. Cameron said a supporter should lead the effort to leave the EU, but May's approach led to one failure after another.

"Theresa May has failed to deliver on Brexit. She has also been seen within the conservative party as incredibly weak in her dealings with the European Union," said Nile Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation and a former assistant to Thatcher after she left office.

May spearheaded two failed attempts for a Brexit deal to clear the House of Commons. It was clear her third attempt would fare no better. Gardiner says the prime minister suffered loss after loss because she kept pursuing the wrong priorities.

"The agreement between the British government and the European Union is in many ways a very bad deal. It doesn't guarantee that Britain is able to exit the EU Customs Union. What that means is that Britain would not be able to sign its own free trade agreements. It would be subject to EU tariffs It would be, in essence, still a part of the European Union," said Gardiner.

"In many ways, Theresa Mayu is the antithesis of Margaret Thatcher. She displayed no real courage in the negotiations with the European Union. She did not stand up to the EU. She caved in to all of their demands. It was a disastrous handling of Brexit and it's time now for a new prime minister who actually fully believes in Brexit and is going to deliver on it," added Gardiner.

Conservative Party members already raised two no-confidence votes against May, but she survived both challenges. Gardiner believes efforts to change the party rules to remove May, coupled with a looming disaster in EU parliamentary elections, played a significant role in May's decision to resign now.

"I think she jumped before she was really pushed out," said Gardiner.

Former London Mayor Boris Johnson is seen as the front-runner to become party leader but Gardiner expects 10-15 people to run for the position. And he's confident that whoever emerges will be serious about implementing the Brexit that voters approved three years ago.

"The majority of leading contenders to replace Theresa May are Brexiteers. They're people who voted for Brexit and believe in Brexit and who are prepared to implement a no-deal Brexit as well," said Gardiner.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Gardiner explain the specific Brexit idea that sealed May's doom within her own party and how the leadership change will likely impact U.S.-British relations for the better.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18068223Fri, 24 May 2019 22:28:54 +0000Radio AmericaBritish Prime Minister Theresa May says she will resign next month over her inability to get a Brexit deal approved by parliament, and a former aide to the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says new leadership will likely mean a clean exit for the...May took office in 2016 in the wake of British voters approving Brexit. Prime Minister David Cameron immediately stepped down after vigorously leading the effort to defeat Brexit. Cameron said a supporter should lead the effort to leave the EU, but May's approach led to one failure after another.

"Theresa May has failed to deliver on Brexit. She has also been seen within the conservative party as incredibly weak in her dealings with the European Union," said Nile Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation and a former assistant to Thatcher after she left office.

May spearheaded two failed attempts for a Brexit deal to clear the House of Commons. It was clear her third attempt would fare no better. Gardiner says the prime minister suffered loss after loss because she kept pursuing the wrong priorities.

"The agreement between the British government and the European Union is in many ways a very bad deal. It doesn't guarantee that Britain is able to exit the EU Customs Union. What that means is that Britain would not be able to sign its own free trade agreements. It would be subject to EU tariffs It would be, in essence, still a part of the European Union," said Gardiner.

"In many ways, Theresa Mayu is the antithesis of Margaret Thatcher. She displayed no real courage in the negotiations with the European Union. She did not stand up to the EU. She caved in to all of their demands. It was a disastrous handling of Brexit and it's time now for a new prime minister who actually fully believes in Brexit and is going to deliver on it," added Gardiner.

Conservative Party members already raised two no-confidence votes against May, but she survived both challenges. Gardiner believes efforts to change the party rules to remove May, coupled with a looming disaster in EU parliamentary elections, played a significant role in May's decision to resign now.

"I think she jumped before she was really pushed out," said Gardiner.

Former London Mayor Boris Johnson is seen as the front-runner to become party leader but Gardiner expects 10-15 people to run for the position. And he's confident that whoever emerges will be serious about implementing the Brexit that voters approved three years ago.

"The majority of leading contenders to replace Theresa May are Brexiteers. They're people who voted for Brexit and believe in Brexit and who are prepared to implement a no-deal Brexit as well," said Gardiner.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Gardiner explain the specific Brexit idea that sealed May's doom within her own party and how the leadership change will likely impact U.S.-British relations for the better.]]>510news,may,uk,boris,johnson,tories,theresa,brexitcleanfullRadio AmericaBritish Prime Minister Theresa May says she will resign next month over her inability to get a Brexit deal approved by parliament, and a former aide to the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says new leadership will likely mean a clean exit for the country from the European Union.
May took office in 2016 in the wake of British voters approving Brexit. Prime Minister David Cameron immediately stepped down after vigorously leading the effort to defeat Brexit. Cameron said a supporter should lead the effort to leave the EU, but May's approach led to one failure after another.
"Theresa May has failed to deliver on Brexit. She has also been seen within the conservative party as incredibly weak in her dealings with the European Union," said Nile Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation and a former assistant to Thatcher after she left office.
May spearheaded two failed attempts for a Brexit deal to clear the House of Commons. It was clear her third attempt would fare no better. Gardiner says the prime minister suffered loss after loss because she kept pursuing the wrong priorities.
"The agreement between the British government and the European Union is in many ways a very bad deal. It doesn't guarantee that Britain is able to exit the EU Customs Union. What that means is that Britain would not be able to sign its own free trade agreements. It would be subject to EU tariffs It would be, in essence, still a part of the European Union," said Gardiner.
"In many ways, Theresa Mayu is the antithesis of Margaret Thatcher. She displayed no real courage in the negotiations with the European Union. She did not stand up to the EU. She caved in to all of their demands. It was a disastrous handling of Brexit and it's time now for a new prime minister who actually fully believes in Brexit and is going to deliver on it," added Gardiner.
Conservative Party members already raised two no-confidence votes against May, but she survived both challenges. Gardiner believes efforts to change the party rules to remove May, coupled with a looming disaster in EU parliamentary elections, played a significant role in May's decision to resign now.
"I think she jumped before she was really pushed out," said Gardiner.
Former London Mayor Boris Johnson is seen as the front-runner to become party leader but Gardiner expects 10-15 people to run for the position. And he's confident that whoever emerges will be serious about implementing the Brexit that voters approved three years ago.
"The majority of leading contenders to replace Theresa May are Brexiteers. They're people who voted for Brexit and believe in Brexit and who are prepared to implement a no-deal Brexit as well," said Gardiner.
Listen to the full podcast to hear Gardiner explain the specific Brexit idea that sealed May's doom within her own party and how the leadership change will likely impact U.S.-British relations for the better.NoDisaster Aid Bill Stalledhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/10614200/disaster-aidhttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/18068154Fri, 24 May 2019 21:07:10 +0000Radio AmericaTexas Representative Chip Roy blocked an attempt to pass a 19.1 billion dollar disaster relief bill via unanimous consent. Montie Montgomery has more.95texas,bill,disaster,reliefcleanfullRadio AmericaTexas Representative Chip Roy blocked an attempt to pass a 19.1 billion dollar disaster relief bill via unanimous consent. Montie Montgomery has more.No